ECT Oikonomia (dispensation/stewardship) of Grace
- Thread starter Tambora
- Start date
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Danoh needs to give Tet the ole "Drop Dead"!
Yep. That is what MAD is about - about sound distinctions.
It is why I often begin a posting of my understanding on one thing or another with the words "Within the MAD that I hold to, more or less..."
My hope through that being that readers not conclude right off that my understanding is "a one size fits all" MADs, as that is not fair to those MADs who's views might differ.
MAD is about sound distinctions.
To no avail, of course :chuckle:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
To no avail, of course
:sozo2:
What's heir got to do with this :rotfl:
Right Divider
Body part
I completely agree Danoh.
A simple example is the fact that the word "gospel" is frequently QUALIFIED with the word OF, thereby defining the SCOPE of what that particular "good news" is in reference to.
They have to be willfully ignorant to miss or ignore those distinctions.
P.S. This does NOT mean that the gospels are somehow CONTRADICTORY to each other OR that there is not some OVERLAP between them.
I was hoping for a "you and yours".
Drop dead Teller of lies - you and yours :chuckle:
By the way, in a sense Moses prophesied your heresy way before Joshua. Nuff said.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The reason Paul said that was to be objective about it; to say look, here's what I teach out there. It's no different from what I teach to Jews. As you can tell from the rest of Galatians, he's not split down the midle about it. there's one message, like the 7 ones of Ephesians 4.
Right Divider
Body part
Yes, the body of Christ has one baptism. Israel had many.
Eph 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)
(4:5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Heb 6:2 (AKJV/PCE)
(6:2) Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
(4:5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Heb 6:2 (AKJV/PCE)
(6:2) Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Hey simple, that's several individuals, just like "hands" is several individuals' hands. Point not accepted.
Right Divider
Body part
That is probably the dumbest post that you've offered here on TOL.
It's the DOCTRINE of BAPTISMS.
Israel had MANY baptisms.
P.S. So Paul was just talking about ONE person?
Interplanner
Well-known member
What does "Israel had many baptisms" mean?
He is talking to Christians about their baptism as an elementary level of their Christian life. What matters is his current subject--that justification from sins in the completed atonement of Christ, which fulfills Israel history and is the new covenant.
He is talking to Christians about their baptism as an elementary level of their Christian life. What matters is his current subject--that justification from sins in the completed atonement of Christ, which fulfills Israel history and is the new covenant.
Right Divider
Body part
No, he is not. That is more silly "Bible stories" from you and also the rest of "Churchianity".
The book TO the HEBREWS is clearly written to the believing remnant of Israel.
It's all about the BETTER promises that THEY will receive in the future when "thy kingdom" comes ON EARTH as it is in heaven.
Interplanner
Well-known member
No they were told that even the people who arrived in Judea in the past were not looking for it, Heb 11. They were looking for Christ who redeems from sin, which is justification. That's why the new Jerusalem is seen and we are part of it, but it is never on the ground.
And then there's the victory over death. Do you think just Jews are concerned about death? So that part of the Gospel is no use to the nations because it is "to Jews." You're way off.
Hebrews is to be sure to Jewish believers who are lapsing back into Judaism. But it is because of the time frame. But it contains all the usual things for all nations about the Gospel. If they don't leave Judaism behind they will get sucked into the battle for liberation with the zealots, which will be a miserable event--if you know your NT history.
By the way, your view is far and away the predominating evangelical, Bible-church view. I'm very minority. The 'churchianity' you referred to is mostly set up as you have explained. I've been to more than I can count who have a horrible understanding of Romans, but mention Israel and they are experts on prophecy, the mill, the rapture etc ad nauseum.
And then there's the victory over death. Do you think just Jews are concerned about death? So that part of the Gospel is no use to the nations because it is "to Jews." You're way off.
Hebrews is to be sure to Jewish believers who are lapsing back into Judaism. But it is because of the time frame. But it contains all the usual things for all nations about the Gospel. If they don't leave Judaism behind they will get sucked into the battle for liberation with the zealots, which will be a miserable event--if you know your NT history.
By the way, your view is far and away the predominating evangelical, Bible-church view. I'm very minority. The 'churchianity' you referred to is mostly set up as you have explained. I've been to more than I can count who have a horrible understanding of Romans, but mention Israel and they are experts on prophecy, the mill, the rapture etc ad nauseum.
Right Divider
Body part
Your post just keep getting sillier and more convoluted. God promised them a kingdom on the earth. If some were not looking for it, it was because the did not believe God.
I have no idea what this "question" is supposed to prove. Jesus said: (John 4:22) "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship: for salvation is of the Jews." Do you not believe that He says?
Some more fanciful story telling. Hebrews is all about encouraging the believing remnant to continue in the doctrines that Christ taught them and to patiently wait for the completion of those promises that God had made to them throughout their history (including Matt 6:10!)
No, most of "Churchianity" is much more along your lines; fabricating an explanation of how the BOOK TO THE HEBREWS is doctrine for the "church today" and how the promises that God made to Israel are either "just spiritual" or "it's all lumped into the church for today" or some other nonsense.
The majority view - in most schools of thought - especially yours - is that of an over reliance on sources external to Scripture, including but not limited to, the external source that is reliance on one's own notions.
You are one more of the old "dime a dozen."
Your books might cost more, contain more parroting of illogic, but that is all you have over the majority in their same over reliance on sources external to Scripture - more of the same, merely glossed over by a much more nuanced book cover.
Interplanner
Well-known member
You're right about the majority having an over-reliance on other sources: on Walfoord, Ryrie, MacAruther, STam, LaHaye, Rosenberg, jenkins.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle: