ECT Lk 24 explodes D'ism because Christ is actually present in the transition

[Interplanner]

Can't be literal.
The days of literalism are over for you.

I mean he is actually rude.

As far as what things mean in Christ: 'the temple he spoke of was his body' Jn 2
'the reality is Christ' Col 2:17
'only in Christ is the veil taken away' 2 Cor 5.

Find some other word if you need to, but when 'Seed' is no longer 'many persons' as in a race of descendants in Gal 3, then 'Seed' obviously means something else besides the literal.

 

[Interplanner]

Happy hour early, Basil? No, Pate asserts that the law is abolished. Sober up. And please throw me another "hard ball," like that original "accusation of hate" technique, "You are just a rude person." Please?

So you don't have any questions about the text of Lk 24. 'We had hoped he would redeem Israel' is one of the most revealing statements about who Christ was speaking to.

 

[Interplanner]

Hey, look, Seymour...I just try to focus on "The Mission," and what do I get from you? Rabble rousing! You beat everything-you know that?

Amazing how you can't see the mission in Lk 24, BUT YOU CAN SEE MILES AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF ISRAEL, CAN'T YOU?

 

[john w]

So you don't have any questions about the text of Lk 24. 'We had hoped he would redeem Israel' is one of the most revealing statements about who Christ was speaking to.

Well, Basil boy, only a moron, like yourself, would attempt to engage someone in a discussion, about a text, Israel, Christ, who asserts that the "text," of Luke 24 is not literal, Israel, is not literal, and Christ, is not literal. I'm not a smart man, Basil, but momma says I'm not stupid..


Your pal, Basil, Forest John....

 

[john w]

Amazing how you can't see the mission in Lk 24, BUT YOU CAN SEE MILES AND THOUSANDS OF YEARS OF ISRAEL, CAN'T YOU?

CAN YOU YELL A LITTLE LOUDER,BASIL...I CAN'T HEAR YOU?!!!!

JOHN "SGT. CARTER" W.


HOw'd I DO?(My caps LOCK is malfunctioning now)

 

[Interplanner]

Well, Basil boy, only a moron, like yourself, would attempt to engage someone in a discussion, about a text, Israel, Christ, who asserts that the "text," of Luke 24 is not literal, Israel, is not literal, and Christ, is not literal. I'm not a smart man, Basil, but momma says I'm not stupid..


Your pal, Basil, Forest John....

No, I go with literal until the text says 'the Seed was Christ, not many (racially descendant) people.'

You are so poor at listening that you don't know what I'm saying.

Or I go with literal until Heb 3:4 says 'we are that house.' Replacing the old covenant house.

Ad infinitum.

You can stop your 'seasoning.' (Basil). You are inside your own head too much.

 

[Interplanner]

CAN YOU YELL A LITTLE LOUDER,BASIL...I CAN'T HEAR YOU?!!!!

JOHN "SGT. CARTER" W.


HOw'd I DO?(My caps LOCK is malfunctioning now)

why do you see all kinds of things for Israel there, but totally mock the mission in countless video clips, cartoons and graphics?

'we had hoped...' means their hope was totally misdirected...because they were steeped in what Judaism told them was reality.

 

[john w]

No, I go with literal until the text says 'the Seed was Christ, not many (racially descendant) people.'

You are so poor at listening that you don't know what I'm saying.

Or I go with literal until Heb 3:4 says 'we are that house.' Replacing the old covenant house.

Ad infinitum.

You can stop your 'seasoning.' (Basil). You are inside your own head too much.

No, no, no, Basil boy,as you taught us that the days of literalism are over, and and everyone knows that "the Seed was Christ...Hebrews 3:4 ''we', the old covenant house............" are not literal, nor is "Christ," according to you.

You taught us that, Basil-we learned it from your eggecashun, and skolarship...lol(you taught us that also).



And again, only a moron, like yourself, would attempt to engage someone in a discussion, about a text, Israel, Christ, who asserts that the "text," of Luke 24 is not literal, Israel, is not literal, and Christ, is not literal. I'm not a smart man, Basil, but momma says I'm not stupid..


Your pal, Basil, Forest John....

 

[Interplanner]

No, no, no, Basil boy,as you taught us that the days of literalism are over, and and everyone knows that "the Seed was Christ...Hebrews 3:4 ''we', the old covenant house............" are not literal, nor is "Christ," according to you.

You taught us that, Basil-we learned it from your eggecashun, and skolarship...lol(you taught us that also).



And again, only a moron, like yourself, would attempt to engage someone in a discussion, about a text, Israel, Christ, who asserts that the "text," of Luke 24 is not literal, Israel, is not literal, and Christ, is not literal. I'm not a smart man, Basil, but momma says I'm not stupid..


Your pal, Basil, Forest John....

You are not saying anything clear 10x now.

What is the background of 'we had hoped...'?

 

[Right Divider]

You are not saying anything clear 10x now.

What is the background of 'we had hoped...'?

They did not understand the resurrection. Wow... that was a tough one!

Dan 7:27 (AKJV/PCE)​

(7:27) And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

​

Matt 6:10 (AKJV/PCE)​

(6:10) Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.

​

Luke 1:31-33 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (1:32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (1:33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. ​

Clear as can be.

 

[Interplanner]

They did not understand the resurrection. Wow... that was a tough one!

Dan 7:27 (AKJV/PCE)​

(7:27) And the kingdom and dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the most High, whose kingdom [is] an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him.

​

Matt 6:10 (AKJV/PCE)​

(6:10) Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as [it is] in heaven.

​

Luke 1:31-33 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (1:32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (1:33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. ​

Clear as can be.

Right. But I was trying to get JohnW out of his addiction to his own humor and into actually communicating about real questions.

The resurrection was the establishment of the kingdom in the passages you mentioned. It had a power to it for salvation, which is Christ's forgiving power.

Which is why 'they had hoped' and were disappointed, because Judaism told them--against what Dan 9 said--that there would be golden age in Judea with a new temple, and the nations would defer and bow down to them.

 

[Right Divider]

Right. But I was trying to get JohnW out of his addiction to his own humor and into actually communicating about real questions.

The resurrection was the establishment of the kingdom in the passages you mentioned.

Fictitious nonsense.You just wave your magic wand and we're just supposed to agree?

Your fairy story has you trying to force a square peg into a round hole.

It had a power to it for salvation, which is Christ's forgiving power.

:dizzy:

1Pet 1:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:5) Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

​

Why does Peter speak of a future salvation?

Which is why 'they had hoped' and were disappointed, because Judaism told them--against what Dan 9 said--that there would be golden age in Judea with a new temple, and the nations would defer and bow down to them.

Israel will be the head nation when Christ restores them to that place.

Isa 60:15-16 (AKJV/PCE)​

(60:15) Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through [thee], I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. (60:16) Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD [am] thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. ​

Your problem is your unbelief.

 

[john w]

You are not saying anything clear 10x now.

What is the background of 'we had hoped...'?

No, no, no,Basil. "we" is not literal!!!

How'd I do?

 

[john w]

Right. But I was trying to get JohnW out of his addiction to his own humor and into actually communicating about real questions.

The resurrection was the establishment of the kingdom in the passages you mentioned. It had a power to it for salvation, which is Christ's forgiving power.

Which is why 'they had hoped' and were disappointed, because Judaism told them--against what Dan 9 said--that there would be golden age in Judea with a new temple, and the nations would defer and bow down to them.

No, no, no, Basil.....According to you, the resurrection is not literal.


How'd I do, Basil?

 

[Interplanner]

Fictitious nonsense.You just wave your magic wand and we're just supposed to agree?

Your fairy story has you trying to force a square peg into a round hole.


:dizzy:

1Pet 1:5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(1:5) Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

​

Why does Peter speak of a future salvation?


Israel will be the head nation when Christ restores them to that place.

Isa 60:15-16 (AKJV/PCE)​

(60:15) Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through [thee], I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. (60:16) Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD [am] thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. ​

Your problem is your unbelief.

The NT never validates what you are saying.

Of course there is a sense of future to our salvation, but justification is also now. We are justified now and our life is hid in Christ and will be revealed in him. Col 3. You are totally unfamiliar with what the NT actually says.

There is also no other understanding of Acts 2:30,31 possible. The message ends with Peter declaring Jesus is Lord and Christ, and uses Ps 2 and Ps 2 is used in Acts 4 when they pray. Not because it is something off in the future, but because the kingdom is at war.

 

[Interplanner]

No, no, no, Basil.....According to you, the resurrection is not literal.


How'd I do, Basil?

You are your own worst problem and it is overwhelming.

 

[Right Divider]

The NT never validates what you are saying.

Your perverted interp of the NT is your problem.

Of course there is a sense of future to our salvation, but justification is also now.

In WHAT sense is Peter speaking?

We are justified now and our life is hid in Christ and will be revealed in him. Col 3. You are totally unfamiliar with what the NT actually says.

I'm quite familiar with Paul's epistles and can understand the difference between what he writes and the Hebrew epistles.

Your vain attempts at blenderism are, once again, your problem.

There is also no other understanding of Acts 2:30,31 possible. The message ends with Peter declaring Jesus is Lord and Christ, and uses Ps 2 and Ps 2 is used in Acts 4 when they pray. Not because it is something off in the future, but because the kingdom is at war.

:french:

You are confused and unbelieving of ALL things that are in the Word of God.

 

[john w]

You are your own worst problem and it is overwhelming.

No, no, no, Basil. "problem" is a literal word.


Rember, Basil...Focus on the ....

 

[Tambora]

Your perverted interp of the NT is your problem.

He likes his fiction version better.

 

[Interplanner]

Your perverted interp of the NT is your problem.


In WHAT sense is Peter speaking?


I'm quite familiar with Paul's epistles and can understand the difference between what he writes and the Hebrew epistles.

Your vain attempts at blenderism are, once again, your problem.


:french:

You are confused and unbelieving of ALL things that are in the Word of God.

Sorry but there is no contest: the NT is full of speaking of salvation as past, present and future. Even of justification, if you follow Phil 3. So there is no conflict in what Peter says is future because the believers are indivisible, because they are "in Christ." You don't have to figure out ANYTHING about Israel to know that.

Tambora's comment about fiction is dishonest.