Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The NT theology core

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • ECT: The NT theology core

    Here are some of the most solid and vital 'teachings of the apostles' (Acts 4) that matter:

    1, God was in Christ, resolving the sin debt of mankind, 2 Cor 5. This is historic fact, as much as creation or the cataclysm themselves. Paul says this after saying that he once knew Christ 'kata sarka'--in an ordinary way, only to realize later what the truth was 'in Christ.' In Christ, God imputed mankinds sins to Christ, and those who believe what Christ did receive the imputation of the righteousness of God back.

    The person who is thus forgiven is quite different from the unforgiven one.

    2, The resurrection of Christ was God approving his sacrifice for justification from our sins. In other words, the apostles spent more time concerned with what the resurrection proved than what proved the resurrection, though that kind of thing is needed. Act 13, Rom 4.

    3, The resurrection was the completion of Abraham's promises, Acts 13. Everything else (land, descendants) had taken place at various times. So now the promise to bless the nations through the Gospel remained to be clarified. Paul's career was spent demonstrating that the mission of God to the nations was contained as far back as Abraham, and that because it was answering the evil attempt by mankind to be their own god and theocracy. He grew up in post-exile Judaism thinking that God no longer had much to do with them, or if so, it was marginal, and through many complications of the law, and what really thrilled Judaism was the prospect of a 'Christ' that would somehow extract Israel from Roman administration. Some Judaizers turned violent trying to believe that last one!

    When expressing #1 above (God was in Christ) the 2nd thing Paul says is that God has also given us (believers) the ministry of resolving this debt; the mission of Christ is always that close-held to the MESSAGE.

    For those who believed, it was thrilling to hear that the mission of God was moving out all over the earth and was the age prophesied especially in Isaiah about the knowledge of the Lord reaching the islands and edges of the earth. Especially since Israel the country was overrun, collapsing and about to burn.

    4, The resurrection of Christ was also his enthronement. #2 is saying that God approved Christ's sacrifice and thus raised him. "Raised" in Acts 13:33 is not Jesus' general appearance on the scene, but resurrection from a vicarious death. But it was also his enthronement, Acts 2:30-31. David foresaw this happening. David's "Lord" could not be just a standard descendant; it had to be God's Holy One who also 'would not see corruption' because of his perfect sacrificial life. "Seeing what was ahead, [David] spoke of the resurrection of the Christ". There was also a gift back to mankind upon his taking his seat, which was the work of the Spirit. This was no abstraction or private affair. Everyone there from 'every nation under heaven' had now heard clearly what had taken place in the Gospel event, and would automatically repeat it when they returned home.

    Preaching Christ as Lord meant to preach that he is the Lord of the earth now, to whom all mankind, great and small should bow and submit and obey. That is the arrival of the reign of God that was anticipated from the first things John the cleanser announced.



    These doctrines 'turned the world upside down,' confounded Caesar with a God greater than himself, yet presented by people who obeyed Rome's laws, and reached from Spain to India in the first generation.
    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

  • #2
    Here we go again, in yet another thread where IP will not accept the truth.

    We don't tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters exist.
    They already know monsters exist.
    We tell our children fairy tales so that they will know that monsters can be killed.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Tambora View Post
      Here we go again, in yet another thread where IP will not accept the truth.
      Here we go again, another reactive thread without detailed questions. There is nothing there that is flawed.
      All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Interplanner View Post
        Here we go again,
        You started it.
        Jer 23:5 Behold, the days come, saith the LORD[YHVH], that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth.
        Jer 23:6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely: and this is his name whereby he[the Branch] shall be called, THE LORD[YHVH] OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by steko View Post
          You started it.
          Don't make me get my Glock

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Interplanner View Post
            Here are some of the most solid and vital 'teachings of the apostles' (Acts 4) that matter:

            1, God was in Christ, resolving the sin debt of mankind, 2 Cor 5. This is historic fact, as much as creation or the cataclysm themselves. Paul says this after saying that he once knew Christ 'kata sarka'--in an ordinary way, only to realize later what the truth was 'in Christ.' In Christ, God imputed mankinds sins to Christ, and those who believe what Christ did receive the imputation of the righteousness of God back.
            And you wonder why I nick-named you DingleBerry?

            That is called "bait and switch".

            2 Cor is NOT Acts 4.
            All of my ancestors are human.
            Originally posted by Squeaky
            That explains why your an idiot.
            Originally posted by God's Truth
            Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
            Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
            (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

            1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
            (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

            Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Interplanner View Post
              God imputed mankinds sins to Christ
              Yes, that is the plan. God had no desire to create another Lucifer.

              "You were perfect in your ways from the day you were created till iniquity was found in you." (Ezekiel 28:15)

              Comment


              • #8
                One random thing, IP.

                I would say that Christ "fulfilled" the promises to Abraham. "Completed" is a good choice of vocabulary, especially given it's synonymous with "finished." (After all, Christ did say "It is finished.")
                But some people use improper connotations to make "completed" mean "abolished." "Abolish" being a cease to exist or bear relevance. "Completed" things can still be relevant, evidenced by education.

                Not being nitpicky, just tossing in my penny's worth, while hopefully providing future argumentative points for your discussions.


                Sent from my iPhone using TOL

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by jsanford108 View Post
                  One random thing, IP.

                  I would say that Christ "fulfilled" the promises to Abraham. "Completed" is a good choice of vocabulary, especially given it's synonymous with "finished." (After all, Christ did say "It is finished.")
                  But some people use improper connotations to make "completed" mean "abolished." "Abolish" being a cease to exist or bear relevance. "Completed" things can still be relevant, evidenced by education.

                  Not being nitpicky, just tossing in my penny's worth, while hopefully providing future argumentative points for your discussions.
                  Talks about some wild-eyed equivocation!
                  All of my ancestors are human.
                  Originally posted by Squeaky
                  That explains why your an idiot.
                  Originally posted by God's Truth
                  Father figure, Son figure, and Holy Spirit figure.
                  Col 2:9 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (2:9) For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily.

                  1Tim 4:10 (AKJV/PCE)
                  (4:10) For therefore we both labour and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Saviour of all men, specially of those that believe.

                  Something that was SPOKEN OF since the world began CANNOT be the SAME thing as something KEPT SECRET since the world began.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Right Divider View Post
                    Talks about some wild-eyed equivocation!




                    Not really. There is another use of 'seal up vision and prophecy' in Daniel, and in context, it means the end of it. It is not out of the question as far as Messiah's accomplishments in Dan 9. That He concluded it, completed it.
                    All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by steko View Post
                      You started it.





                      I did not start conflict. there is no reason a person can't dissent from D'ism. There is no unstated rule here or in any church that says we have to worship the complications of d'ism. That's a horrible starting point. The question is what is truth?

                      How come a person supposedly with God's spirit, can't rejoice in the "God was in Christ justifying men from their sins"? If they looked further they might even find 10 things to agree on. How about it, instead of infantile conflict she started?
                      All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Right Divider View Post
                        And you wonder why I nick-named you DingleBerry?

                        That is called "bait and switch".

                        2 Cor is NOT Acts 4.



                        No, but both are the apostle's teaching. Peter and Paul are deeply unified, as I've shown. I know, you need to find divisions and fractures, so here you go on that. The 'apostle's teaching' was given in the 40 day seminar. And the same one Lord and Christ taught Paul the same deeply unified things later. I don't know the name of your other guy who invents two peoples, gospels, outcomes, heavens, place of worship, etc. every day.
                        All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          1, God was in Christ, dealing with the debt of sin
                          2, the resurrection is the completion of promises to the fathers; land and kingdom were already done, says Paul in that same sermon
                          3, the resurrection was an award to Christ for completing justification from sins
                          4, the resurrection was the enthronement on David's throne; that is a direct quote from Peter, Acts 2:30-31

                          I only wrote out the summary statements so that people like Tam who call it trash can say exactly which one they think is trash and why. These things are historic, apostolic teaching. A Christian should be above 95% on board.
                          All Lives Matter --Marcus Sanford, youtube.com

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            The argument of dispensationalism against the Gospel could be identified and spelled out in a specific and systematic way.

                            Dispensationalism fundamentally argues against - gets into a dialectic against - the doctrines seen in Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8, Romans 11: 1-5, Romans 11: 17-20, Galatians 3: 3, 16, 26-29, Galatians 4: 24-26 and Hebrews 10: 9, John 10: 16, Romans 12: 4-5 and Ephesians 4: 4.

                            Look at κατα σαρκα, kata sarka. Dispensationalism starts from that which is of the flesh - the race, or the chosen race, the bloodline. Literal circumcision, is kata sarka, while several Old Testament texts talk about circumcision of the heart, or a spiritual kind of change.

                            But ......."Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked." Deuteronomy 10: 16

                            And........"And the LORD thy God will circumcise thine heart, and the heart of thy seed, to love the LORD thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul, that thou mayest live." Deuteronomy 30: 6

                            "Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem: lest my fury come forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, because of the evil of your doings." Jeremiah 4: 4

                            Then in Romans 11: 28-29 Paul says "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29. But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God."

                            Literal circumcision was just a shadow, as in Colossians 2: 16-17, of that substance which was to come when Jesus Christ appeared, the "circumcision" of the heart, being born again in Christ, so the soul could live eternally with Christ?

                            Dispensationalism focuses on the land, something else which is κατα σαρκα, kata sarka.

                            Lewis S. Chafer said that dispensationalism has
                            "...changed the Bible from being a mass of more or less conflicting
                            writings into a classified and easily assimilated revelation of both
                            the earthly and heavenly purposes of God, which reach on into eternity
                            to come.." Lewis. S. Chafer, ‘Dispensationalism,’ Bibliotheca Sacra, 93 (October 1936), 410, 416, 446-447

                            Dispensationalism is deceptive as a name for the theology of Darby, Scofield and Chafer - because fundamentally what is called "dispensationalism" teaches that certain parts of the Old Covenant of Israel still exist after the Cross of Christ and the Day of Pentecost. And the dispensationalists will not always be clear about which parts of the Old Covenant still exist for them.

                            They try to avoid giving their interpretation of scriptures such as John 10: 16, Romans 12: 4-5, Ephesians 4: 4, Romans 10: 12, Galatians 3: 28, Romans 2: 28-29, Romans 9: 6-8, Romans 11: 17-20, II Corinthians 3: 6-11, Galatians 3: 3, 16-17, 27-29, Galatians 4: 24-26, and Hebrews 10: 9.

                            They make use of a system of Bible interpretation which tends to compartmentalize scriptures and avoid interpreting scripture by other scripture. That, for example, can lead to an interpretation of Romans 11: 26 which says that "all Israel" refers to all the elect regardless of genetics.

                            The focus of dispensationalism upon the flesh, sarka, makes it more likely that those under this theology will remain in the spiritual state of he natural man of I Corinthians 2: 14, who does not receive the things of God. "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3: 3

                            "And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." Romans 12: 2

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Poor northwye, another lost soul

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X