ECT The Broken Record of MAD

[musterion]

Since Paul never used the term "age of grace" and Interplanner knows that he cannot quote Paul using that term why in the world does he continue to insist that Paul used that term?

I am puzzled!

You've been gone awhile so maybe you never saw it, but Tet (and then IP who came later) insisted WE define dispensation as a set period of time when (as far as I've read) none of us do so. I even posted this more than once but Tet ignored it. So does IP. The reason they keep doing this is their preterism demands it.

They are liars, suppressing truth in unrighteousness and hypocrisy...they KNOW that's now how we define the term but keep on with it.

 

[musterion]

Rather the opposite: I was the one saying grace was there all the time; the problem was constriction of it by Judaism, and after all, the Christian Gospel was initially preached at an entrenched Judaism, wasn't it?

But while grace was there all the time, Christ and Paul are trying to get people to administer it in a very different way from that of the law. As different as the two forgiven people in Mt 18's parable. One assumes debt is to be paid back. The other understands cancellation. They become two very different people. The dispensation of grace that Paul realized he was working in was the latter.

I'm tired of trying to explain to you AGAIN AND AGAIN what several of us have already told you but you don't want to hear. MADs have always said God has always given grace. You won't find one that says He didn't.

 

[Interplanner]

I'm tired of trying to explain to you AGAIN AND AGAIN what several of us have already told you but you don't want to hear. MADs have always said God has always given grace. You won't find one that says He didn't.

D'ism usually says Judaism is a works religion to justify why a 2nd program could be operating. It 'earns' a theocracy on earth; Christians believe on Christ for a life in heaven. Christ gets dizzy going back and forth.

So why did you pound me for saying I had fixed a certain time for it? It's called the administration of grace by Paul because you can't use that name for what Judaism was doing in its mistakes, concisely summarized in Gal 3:17.

 

[musterion]

D'ism usually says Judaism is a works religion to justify why a 2nd program could be operating. It 'earns' a theocracy on earth; Christians believe on Christ for a life in heaven. Christ gets dizzy going back and forth.

So why did you pound me for saying I had fixed a certain time for it? It's called the administration of grace by Paul because you can't use that name for what Judaism was doing in its mistakes, concisely summarized in Gal 3:17.

I was the one saying grace was there all the time;

Put up or shut up. Name ONE MAD who says grace wasn't there the whole time.

 

[Interplanner]

Put up or shut up. Name ONE MAD who says grace wasn't there the whole time.

If you fixed that problem in D'ism good for you, but I've read all you boys about what you really think was going on in early Acts and you think compliance to the law was very important, you misunderstand the fuss about the law, several of you have the Peter capitulation backwards, you have very little use for the resolution of the council in 15; in short, an absence of grace way into Acts. All because you think a theocratic kingdom nearly happened and that the mission of the Gospel was an afterthought or 'mystery.'

 

[musterion]

If you fixed that problem in D'ism good for you, but I've read all you boys about what you really think was going on in early Acts and you think compliance to the law was very important, you misunderstand the fuss about the law, several of you have the Peter capitulation backwards, you have very little use for the resolution of the council in 15; in short, an absence of grace way into Acts. All because you think a theocratic kingdom nearly happened and that the mission of the Gospel was an afterthought or 'mystery.'

Name the MAD who said grace wasn't there the whole time.

 

[Right Divider]

If you fixed that problem in D'ism good for you, but I've read all you boys about what you really think was going on in early Acts and you think compliance to the law was very important, you misunderstand the fuss about the law, several of you have the Peter capitulation backwards, you have very little use for the resolution of the council in 15; in short, an absence of grace way into Acts. All because you think a theocratic kingdom nearly happened and that the mission of the Gospel was an afterthought or 'mystery.'

So you think that compliance to the law was not important?
Now I know, for sure, that you do not own a Bible.

 

[Interplanner]

So you think that compliance to the law was not important?
Now I know, for sure, that you do not own a Bible.

If compliance to the law was right up there with the Gospel, why did the council conclude with just 4 items calling the law a burden no one can bear?

 

[Right Divider]

If compliance to the law was right up there with the Gospel, why did the council conclude with just 4 items calling the law a burden no one can bear?

Are you a dispensationalist now?

Matt 23:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(23:23) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. ​

Jesus publicly declares that ALL of the law should be kept! Did something change later?

 

[dodge]

Are you a dispensationalist now?

Matt 23:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(23:23) Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier [matters] of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. ​

Jesus publicly declares that ALL of the law should be kept! Did something change later?

Yes, of course something changed, and here I was almost beginning to believe you could read !

Jhn 1:17
For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

 

[SimpleMan77]

You are using a faulty translation. Here is the correct one:

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life" (2 Cor.3:6; KJV).

That is your answer so you can no longer say that you haven't been given an answer. I can tell you how members of the Body can be ministers of the New Testament but how can those same people be ministers of the New Covenant?

Testament = covenant. The same Greek word is translated in the Bible both ways in different verses.
The New Testament is His New Covenant. The writings of the Apostles only tell of two Testaments/Covenants. One under the law, and one that started before the law under Abraham, and was reestablished at Calvary.
When Jesus died it was reopened to everyone of every nationality.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

Testament = covenant. The same Greek word is translated in the Bible both ways in different verses.
The New Testament is His New Covenant. The writings of the Apostles only tell of two Testaments/Covenants. One under the law, and one that started before the law under Abraham, and was reestablished at Calvary.
When Jesus died it was reopened to everyone of every nationality.



Indeed.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

Indeed.

 

[patrick jane]

Time to put up a study, PJ.

Study it out; don't be like what's his name...the so called Ignorer :chuckle:

Time to put up or shut up Danoh :chuckle:

 

[Danoh]

Time to put up or shut up Danoh :chuckle:

You never watched that expose of Trump that I posted; did you?

It was actually halfway decent (no where near the extent of his long corrupt history).

Oh well.

You tried :chuckle:

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Time to put up or shut up Danoh :chuckle:

We should settle for him just shutting up, PJ.

 

[Interplanner]

You never watched that expose of Trump that I posted; did you?

It was actually halfway decent (no where near the extent of his long corrupt history).

Oh well.

You tried :chuckle:

I wouldn't be surprised if this means you didn't default vote for him to prevent the Criminaltons from the next installment of despotism, because that's what we'll get.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Still praying for God's will so far as Trump becoming our next President. I'm also praying that God will intervene and stop Hillary from taking her evil self into the White House and destroying this country of ours. If she wins, we will be observing the beginning of the end of our nation. I have a close relative that is voting for Hillary. He doesn't know why. If asked: "What has Hillary accomplished?" You hear a deafening, "Cricket Choir." These type people just know that they can't stand Trump. Why they don't like him, they can't seem to put into words?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Testament = covenant.

You really need to read the Bible again because a "covenant" is not a "testament." When we look at the following verse we can know that the word "testament" is in regard to the Lord Jesus' Last Will and Testament:

"For where a testament (diatheke) is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament (diatheke) is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth" (Heb.9:16-17).

Dean Alford wrote that "It is quite vain to deny the testamentary sense of 'diatheke' in this verse....I believe it will be found that we must at all hazards accept the meaning of 'testament,' as being the only one which will in any way meet the plain requirement of the verse" [emphasis added] (Alford, The Greek Testament, IV:173, 174; cf. the renderings of ASV, RSV).

Scott Murray wrote that "the sense of 'last will and testament' was the primary and most prevalent meaning of the word 'diatheke' in Hellenistic Greek" (Murray, "The Concept of Diatheke in the Letter to the Hebrews," Concordia Theological Quarterly, Vol. 66:1, Jan., 2002, p.54-55).

We must throw reason to the wind in order to imagine that the word "testament" at Hebrews 9:16-17 is referring to a covenant.

 

[Interplanner]

JS,
you're not paying attention at all. Look at Heb 9. The English testament used properly for covenant. You are out of your depth.