ECT Yet Future?

[Interplanner]

More of your unbelief. The New Jerusalem comes down AFTER the thousand year reign of Christ on the earth. Something that you clearly know nothing about.


The irony is strong with this one.


Immediate and YET your say that it came over ~30-40 years later. No, it is still after the LORDS DAY [Rev 1:10] (which you apparently also know nothing about).

Note that the LORDS DAY will not be like the picnic that was 70 AD.

Christ reigns now. It is a very long reign. At the end Satan breaks out. Then this earth will be destroyed and/or become a place of fire and the NHNE made. That is the plain meaning, which is why you avoid it.

"Immediate" about the Rev would depend on when it was written. Mid-60s I'd say. I said nothing about it being written 30-40 years earlier, so go back and tell that to that phantom.

The day of the Lord started with the crucifixion...all of it was expected shortly...Paul never refers to a distant future of any of this.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Christ reigns now. It is a very long reign. At the end Satan breaks out. Then this earth will be destroyed and/or become a place of fire and the NHNE made. That is the plain meaning, which is why you avoid it.

"Immediate" about the Rev would depend on when it was written. Mid-60s I'd say. I said nothing about it being written 30-40 years earlier, so go back and tell that to that phantom.

The day of the Lord started with the crucifixion...all of it was expected shortly...Paul never refers to a distant future of any of this.

:chuckle: Wow.

The LORD reigns when he returns.
Get into the scripture, set aside the many many commentaries. You will be better off.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The day of the Lord started with the crucifixion...all of it was expected shortly...Paul never refers to a distant future of any of this.

Absolutely clueless...

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

That is the plain meaning, which is why you avoid it.

Thick thick irony...


Heb 8:8 (KJV)
Jer 31:31 (KJV)

 

[Interplanner]

IP likes to avoid scripture that directly mentions the new covenant.

Tam,
go back and you'll see the situation is just the opposite: the club only seems to know the line about Israel and Judah. There is a whole thread begging them to comment on Heb 9's how the new covenant deals with sin's debt, deals with it now, in Christ and does not mention anything about a future Israel.

I have also reprimanded RD and STP many times for not dealing with the present sense of the last supper, nor of 2 Cor 3-5 nor of I Cor 11.

You have it all backwards.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Tam,
go back and you'll see the situation is just the opposite: the club only seems to know the line about Israel and Judah. There is a whole thread begging them to comment on Heb 9's how the new covenant deals with sin's debt, deals with it now, in Christ and does not mention anything about a future Israel.

I have also reprimanded RD and STP many times for not dealing with the present sense of the last supper, nor of 2 Cor 3-5 nor of I Cor 11.

You have it all backwards.

:chuckle:

 

[Right Divider]

The day of the Lord started with the crucifixion...all of it was expected shortly...Paul never refers to a distant future of any of this.

:french:
No, it did not. You constantly conflate terms in an effort to support your fairy tale.

The day of the LORD is the time of His WRATH which will be FAR more extensive than that little 70 AD thing.

 

[Right Divider]

Tam,
go back and you'll see the situation is just the opposite: the club only seems to know the line about Israel and Judah. There is a whole thread begging them to comment on Heb 9's how the new covenant deals with sin's debt, deals with it now, in Christ and does not mention anything about a future Israel.

I have also reprimanded RD and STP many times for not dealing with the present sense of the last supper, nor of 2 Cor 3-5 nor of I Cor 11.

You have it all backwards.

:rotfl:

 

[Tambora]

the club only seems to know the line about Israel and Judah.

It's a major line concerning the new covenant, who GOD made the new covenant with, and what the new covenant entails for them.

 

[Interplanner]

:rotfl:

So why do you post cartoons instead of explaining the plain meaning of Heb 9?

 

[Interplanner]

It's a major line concerning the new covenant, who GOD made the new covenant with, and what the new covenant entails for them.

But it's not. That is the point. The plain meaning of heb 9 is that it is not about that at all. So that (divided house and solution in Christ) is a picture of reconciliation, but the parties being reconciled are others.

There is no comment on the new covenant that elaborates what you are saying. All the comments by Heb 9 or elsewhere say:

it deals with sin's debt
it deal with it in Christ
it deals with it now
it is to be preached to all nations
it was Christ who dealt with it, being both new priest and new sacrifice
and, it has nothing to do with a future restored Judaism

 

[Tambora]

Thick thick irony...


Heb 8:8 (KJV)
Jer 31:31 (KJV)

It blows the mind how much effort IP puts into trying to make the new covenant NOT be made to the earthly house of Israel and the earthly house of Judah by not going by the scriptures that directly teaches that.
Makes his MO very easy to spot ...... "Hisssss, did GOD really say???"

 

[Interplanner]

:french:
No, it did not. You constantly conflate terms in an effort to support your fairy tale.

The day of the LORD is the time of His WRATH which will be FAR more extensive than that little 70 AD thing.

You are welcome to tell all those millions of people that it was nothing; go right ahead.

 

[Interplanner]

It blows the mind how much effort IP puts into trying to make the new covenant NOT be made to the earthly house of Israel and the earthly house of Judah by not going by the scriptures that directly teaches that.
Makes his MO very easy to spot ...... "Hisssss, did GOD really say???"

God really said Heb 9 and 2 Cor 3-5. Stop the satan crap thinking.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

It blows the mind how much effort IP puts into trying to make the new covenant NOT be made to the earthly house of Israel and the earthly house of Judah by not going by the scriptures that directly teaches that.
Makes his MO very easy to spot ...... "Hisssss, did GOD really say???"

Absolutely, hath God said?
He is not fooling me.

 

[Tambora]

But it's not. That is the point. The plain meaning of heb 9 is that it is not about that at all. So that (divided house and solution in Christ) is a picture of reconciliation, but the parties being reconciled are others.

There is no comment on the new covenant that elaborates what you are saying. All the comments by Heb 9 or elsewhere say:

it deals with sin's debt
it deal with it in Christ
it deals with it now
it is to be preached to all nations
it was Christ who dealt with it, being both new priest and new sacrifice
and, it has nothing to do with a future restored Judaism

Foolish man.
There is not another new covenant in Heb chapter 9 that is different from the new covenant of Heb chapter 8, and is the same new covenant of Jeremiah 31.
There is not another "new covenant".

 

[Interplanner]

:french:
No, it did not. You constantly conflate terms in an effort to support your fairy tale.

The day of the LORD is the time of His WRATH which will be FAR more extensive than that little 70 AD thing.

OK, fair enough. Try 'leading into' the day of the Lord with signs, wonders, the darkened sun, etc. mentioned by Peter in v22.

The reason it blends together is because of the 70th week. The things that happen in are all together. Hard to separate the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the city and sanctuary. God gave Israel a generation to decide to do the right thing, but it failed.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

OK, fair enough. Try 'leading into' the day of the Lord with signs, wonders, the darkened sun, etc. mentioned by Peter in v22.

The reason it blends together is because of the 70th week. The things that happen in are all together. Hard to separate the cutting off of Messiah and the destruction of the city and sanctuary. God gave Israel a generation to decide to do the right thing, but it failed.

Why are the 70 weeks grouped as 7/62/1 ?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

You are welcome to tell all those millions of people that it was nothing; go right ahead.

How do you propose we do that?

 

[Right Divider]

So why do you post cartoons instead of explaining the plain meaning of Heb 9?

Since you cannot even begin to understand that the book to the HEBREWS is written to the HEBREWS, it is impossible to communication with you. That's why.

Heb 9:28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(9:28) So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation. ​

Notice that the UNTO salvation comes at His appearing the SECOND TIME.