ECT 10 Principles of NT eschatology
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
- Status
No.
One should first carefully weigh out their validity.
Problem with attempting to?
The particular paradigm and its' study methods each individual not only basically holds to, but through which each weighs out the validity of one thing or another.
Said paradigm and its' approach may differ, if not simply be either off to begin with; and or off in some key principle needing to be applied.
Obviously, some sort of an objectivity in one's supposed objectivity first needs to be solved for.
In your case, you often assert you go by the history.
You believe that is being objective.
Only to show your sources for said history are theologically biased.
Proving all too often, anything but any kind of an actual objectivity on your part.
Last edited:
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Said with such great authority, yet no one here can take you seriously.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Religious? You shouldn't need to ask! Obviously Christian, not Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist nor pagan. You meant to distinguish within Christianity. That would be the historic teaching of the apostles, Acts 2:42. That's as close as we can get to the 40 days teaching between the Res and Pentecost. History before theology.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
:chuckle:
Interplanner
Well-known member
IntoJ:
have you thought about the 10 propositions here? Do they have basis or do you think I made them up?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
The irony...
Hi and just what does ETHNOS mean in Matt 21:43 and who is that NATION / ETHNOS in that passage ?
Better read John 11:47-51 to see what NATION / ETHNOS really means , don't you see ??
dan p
Yep - in Scripture, what goy, goyim, and ethne are each referring to is defined or determined by each their use - in - each - particular - instance.
Isaiah 8:20
Nehemiah 8:8
Acts 17:11,12
Nevertheless, Rom. 5:8
Right Divider
Body part
What a novel idea! :thumb:
Right Divider
Body part
That "silence is cancellation" premise of yours has you crazy.
A false premise leads to a FALSE conclusion.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
He pits old vs. new instead of believing it all. What a mess.
Hi and John 11 is a KILLER and it teachs what a translitered words mean , as NATION / ERHNOS means race , nation , heathen , gentile and Jewish nation !!
dan p
It still has to be properly understood FIRST.
Case in point, he has misunderstood what the blessing of Abraham refers to.
It is said misunderstanding that he believes.
He believes, but his understanding is off.
The blessing of Abraham actually refers to the blessing Abraham received when he took God at His Word to him, that day.
That in his seed, God would bless all the nations of the earth.
And this good news Abraham took God at His Word on is also a word that IP misunderstands and believes...as misunderstood by him.
Just as he is off in the understanding of what he believes the promise of the Spirit is a reference to.
Admittedly, the wording by itself, confuses many.
Even the promise of the Spirit is not referring to the Spirit.
Rather, to the promise The Spirit gifts one with the possession of, the moment one believes that good news that Paul in his day was referring to - that Christ died for our sins and was raised again for our justification.
One, IP ends up misunderstanding and believing that that was the good news Abraham received.
Two, the promise of The Spirit actually refers to the gift of righteousness.
All these issues are the issue of a right understanding of them, followed by believing said understanding, once such things are properly understood, to begin with.
The Scripture repeatedly emphasizes the need for the one, prior to the other, else one's faith is said to have been in vain, in a baseless, if not, in a misunderstood, understanding.
Nehemiah 8:8 and Nehemiah 8:12.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Right Divider
Body part
Yep.
Luke 7:5 (KJV)
(7:5) For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a synagogue.
John 11:48 (KJV)
(11:48) If we let him thus alone, all [men] will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away both our place and nation.
Both ethnos
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
I'm sure, as an amateur, you are missing something in the nuanced Greek grammar that IP the Great will be able to correct you on.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Good homework but irrelevant to Mt 21. He took the people of Israel in his vineyard and fired them and said it will be worked by a 'nation' that will produce its fruit. That is the criteria. Yes, it was 'ethne' but as we know, the NT does not make race distinctions. It distinguishes on faith vs unbelief.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Made up. The little flock was a nation.
Right Divider
Body part
You are CONFUSING the dispensation of the grace of God with what you call the "NT".
And WHO said that it was relevant to Mt. 21 anyway?
You are so lost in your fairy tale.
- Status