Jesus is Lords? The dilemma of 2P2P

Status
Not open for further replies.

Interplanner

Well-known member
One of the huge complications of 2P2P is that it must double everything that the NT says is a singular claim.

One of these is that "Jesus is Lord" in I Cor 12, which, at that point, summarized everything about the Christian message for Paul.

But the first thing we notice is that he did not say Lords. Nor did he say 'the Jesuses are Lords.' We know why from Eph 1, that Christ has been titled above all titles IN THIS AGE and THE NEXT which is not some sort of millenium on earth for 'catching up on late promises about the land for Israel'. There is none of that, nothing like that in the NT.

But 2P2P has professional complicators and dividers (heaven itself being 3 parts without visitation priviliges) and they would never say what Paul said here. No, they have to go back and do Judaism and have Israel in its land, never quite sure if that means running the worship system all over again, just saying 'the bible says' as though everyone knew it was just that clear and trite. They have to take letters like Hebrews and assign certain verses to Gentiles and others to Jews.

And when it comes to Jesus is Lord, 2P2P will never proclaim that because he is actually Lords. There'll be a Lord in heaven but it will have nothing to do with the earth. In fact, it doesn't right now, no matter what apostles say.

Because in 2P2P you can be reading a conversation that sounds quite vital to the people involved (Christ, apostles, leaders of Judaism, stragglers) and 2P2P says no, that has to do with things X000 years from now. THAT's when Jesus will be Lord. Or THAT's when Jesus will be the new David. etc.

It's real result is to complicate the Bible so badly, I'm not quite sure who would care to be interested.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
This has to be one of Interplanner's silliest claims to date. He has gotten even sillier than Tetelestai.



Hi and he also does not know what LORD / KURIOS really means in 1 Cor 12 or what it means in Rom 10:9 , he IP might be on the way to learn something , as there is ONLY one 1P and 1P and that program is DISPENSATIONALISM , where he has no Knowledge !!

dan p
 
Last edited:

Interplanner

Well-known member
What 2P2P denies, though, is that the Lord is what the OT prophecy meant and
that David foresaw that and
that Christ taught that to Peter (that David foresaw that) and
that no land promise is involved.


These are 2P2P's "Jesus was not god" (the cult statement of JWs).

It is perfectly clear that these are using the OT about Christ that way, except to 2P2P stuck in literalism and stuck not absorbing what the NT says.

2P2P never follows how the NT uses the OT quote. It is always direct from the OT un-informed in Christ. This is true of Heb 8 on Jeremiah, because the rest of Heb 8-10 inteprets and there is no sacrificial operations happening and not in the land of Israel. IT WAS ABOUT CHRIST JESUS.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
I also saw STP's claim about 'complicating' the Bible by not what it means. Well, he doesn't follow what it means in these cases addressed here and that's why it complicates it. He doesn't 'win' simply because he appears to plain about 2 verses in Hebrews; he fails on 100 others. And Heb 8 does not mean there is a land promise. It is a picture of restoration, and we know from the rest of the NT that the restoration in Christ was people from all nations.

STP in particular has NEVER answered for NT passages he does not use as they mean when interp'ing the OT. Such as Acts 2:30, 31, which is both:

the NT interp of the OT and'
Christ's instruction to the apostles in the 40 days through Peter and TOTALLY in harmony with Paul
 

Danoh

New member
The Lord Jesus was "Lord" while He walked the earth. No one in the dispensational camp denies this. And none of us deny that He is not now Lord.

His point is that the so called 2P2Ps might as well assert there are three Jesus-es or three Lords Jesus.

His usual confusion, given where he looks at things from...
 

Danoh

New member
I also saw STP's claim about 'complicating' the Bible by not what it means. Well, he doesn't follow what it means in these cases addressed here and that's why it complicates it. He doesn't 'win' simply because he appears to plain about 2 verses in Hebrews; he fails on 100 others. And Heb 8 does not mean there is a land promise. It is a picture of restoration, and we know from the rest of the NT that the restoration in Christ was people from all nations.

STP in particular has NEVER answered for NT passages he does not use as they mean when interp'ing the OT. Such as Acts 2:30, 31, which is both:

the NT interp of the OT and'
Christ's instruction to the apostles in the 40 days through Peter and TOTALLY in harmony with Paul

2P 2P STP, ay IP?

Looks like ya got yourself one o them there compelsion complexes, hyuk, hyuk.
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and he also does not know what LORD / KURIOS really means in 1 Cor 12 or what it means in Rom 10:9 , he IP might be on the way to learn something , as gthere is ONLY one 1P and 1P and that program is DISPENSATIONALISM , where he has no Knowledge !!

dan p



DanP
in the D'ist college I attended, Ryrie's D'ISM TODAY was required reading. The main chapter was Two Peoples, Two Programs. This was as fundamental as the trinity to orthodox theology.

You seem to need to learn what D'ism is.
 

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
I also saw STP's claim about 'complicating' the Bible by not what it means. Well, he doesn't follow what it means in these cases addressed here and that's why it complicates it. He doesn't 'win' simply because he appears to plain about 2 verses in Hebrews; he fails on 100 others. And Heb 8 does not mean there is a land promise. It is a picture of restoration, and we know from the rest of the NT that the restoration in Christ was people from all nations.

STP in particular has NEVER answered for NT passages he does not use as they mean when interp'ing the OT. Such as Acts 2:30, 31, which is both:

the NT interp of the OT and'
Christ's instruction to the apostles in the 40 days through Peter and TOTALLY in harmony with Paul

They mean exactly what they say, not what you say they say.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
DanP
in the D'ist college I attended, Ryrie's D'ISM TODAY was required reading. The main chapter was Two Peoples, Two Programs. This was as fundamental as the trinity to orthodox theology.

You seem to need to learn what D'ism is.


Hi and you are WORSE THEN THE SO-CALLED Dispensationalist of the past !!

I laugh at at your seemly belief that you studied Dispensationalism and can never prove how you were SAVED under a 1P 1P , can you and you are the FRAUD !!

So , explain what is the GOSPEL under a 1P 1P GOSPEL today , BUT EVADE as always , you COWARD !!

Or maybe explain How Paul was BAPTIZED and when it happened , LOL , so go for it !!

IP THE EVAVER !!

dan p
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi and you are WORSE THEN THE SO-CALLED Dispensationalist of the past !!

I laugh at at your seemly belief that you studied Dispensationalism and can never prove how you were SAVED under a 1P 1P , can you and you are the FRAUD !!

So , explain what is the GOSPEL under a 1P 1P GOSPEL today , BUT EVADE as always , you COWARD !!

Or maybe explain How Paul was BAPTIZED and when it happened , LOL , so go for it !!

IP THE EVAVER !!

dan p


You mean: what 'experience'. That is irrelevant. I wasn't leaving Judaism. The material thing is that God was in Christ saving us from the debt of sin on our record.
 

DAN P

Well-known member
You mean: what 'experience'. That is irrelevant. I wasn't leaving Judaism. The material thing is that God was in Christ saving us from the debt of sin on our record.


Hi , and you still like to DANCE , and where were you saved under a 1P 1P gospel !!

Come on EVADER , you know what I asked and can not answer how you were saved UNDER A 1P 1P Gospel , can you , so who are you KIDDING ??

You wasted a lot of money when you went to bible college , , what a waste !!

dan p
 

Nick M

Black Rifles Matter
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
scarecrow-on-bale-of-hay.jpg
 

Interplanner

Well-known member
Hi , and you still like to DANCE , and where were you saved under a 1P 1P gospel !!

Come on EVADER , you know what I asked and can not answer how you were saved UNDER A 1P 1P Gospel , can you , so who are you KIDDING ??

You wasted a lot of money when you went to bible college , , what a waste !!


No it saved years of subjectivism and introspection. I saw where they were going and what they thought the Bible was about and had to fight and that is what helps you see things clearly. Also I know 2P2P better than yourself because of that.

dan p
 

DAN P

Well-known member
DanP,
D'ism is by nature going to have at least 2 totally separate, watertight systems. STP has more.


Hi and why does Paul use the Greek word OIKONOMIA in 1 Tim 1:4 ?

Will find that word there ?

Since you are a Greek scholar , ( YOU SAY YOU ARE ) and when you find it in 1 Tim 1:4 , come back and tell us the truth THAT IT IS THERE !!

dan p
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top