ECT MAD interp chaos #456: You can't be in the New Covenant

tetelestai

LIFETIME MEMBER
LIFETIME MEMBER
Who cares about lower case or capital S?

MADists.

MADists have to deny the NC, or their MAD doesn't work out.

Therefore, MADists have to claim 2 Cor 3:6 is not referring to the NC, even though everyone except MADists know that it does indeed refer to the NC.
 

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
MADists.

MADists have to deny the NC, or their MAD doesn't work out.

Therefore, MADists have to claim 2 Cor 3:6 is not referring to the NC, even though everyone except MADists know that it does indeed refer to the NC.

Why do you deny that Genesis is literal, and assert that it is figurative? Why do you assert that you can deny the New Covenant, and the cross, and still be saved?

Why do you Preterists deny the Lord Jesus Christ was literal, as you do the cross? Why do you Preterists deny that the 12 tribes were literal? Why do you Preterists ignore the teachings of the OT, NT, and Paul?

Why do you Preterists attend a church that is made by human hands, fleshly, looking after the flesh?

Preterists have to deny that the Lord Jesus Christ is a man, assert that that signs are invisible, assert that that the Lord Jesus Christ returned invisibly in AD 70, but everyone that lived in 70 AD saw him, and that the resurrection is figurative, or their Preterism does not work out.
 

DAN P

New member
I just now googled Darby's translation and found that although his translation is also lower case; his commentary on the passage was that the new covenant was what was being referred to.

You are just being your same old slandering you.


Hi and I check my KJV and Greek Article " THE " is used before upper case S for Spirit !!

And that was on 2 Cor 3:17 and the New Covenant is NOT MENTIONED IN 2 Cor 3:17 or 18 !!

dan p
 

Danoh

New member
Earlier I wrote...that in verse 6, the sense is "of the spirit" not "of the Spirit."

The KJV is the right translation...

2 Corinthians 3:2 Ye are our epistle written in our hearts, known and read of all men: 3:3 Forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ ministered by us, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshy tables of the heart.

3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

The question to ask is what Paul was talking about when he brought all that into what he was already talking about?

Not surprisingly, as he was writing to the carnal (heart issue) Corinthians; he was talking about a heart or...a spiritual issue.

Thus, the KJV's correct translation of verse 6 in the lower case - "spirit" not "Spirit."

________

I'd forgotten that the KJV underwent various revisions; so my bad for that.

That is on me.

Still, my point had been the basis of my arguement.

My point had been my question - what was Paul talking about when he then brought in his use of the word "spirit."

My comment had nothing to do with what Darby may or may not have held to.

My comment had had to do with my simply reading the chapter asking myself throughout "what is Paul talking about when he brings this up?"

It is a question I often ask myself - no matter what I may or may not know or hold to going into any passage; I put that aside and start over each time.

I have often found much more information through this manner; information right there in the passages that I'd not previously considered and or picked up on during some previous time in the passages.

The conclusions of others may or may not be fine; including my own, but I prefer to start afresh each time.

What do I get when I post my simple finding as a result of that process?

Tet's ever disgraceful compulsion to introduce some issue into things by which he might turn a thing into, that he might then somehow undermine.

The guy would be a comedy of errors were he not so obviously spiritually corrupt; and what that implies about who he really is in his spirit.

For what I have just described as his tactic is exactly the very tactic described of the Adversary as early as Genesis 3.

I pity you, Tet. And your wife. And especially your children.

You are ever lower than low.

And that can not go well for your family under your corrupt influence.
 
Last edited:

john w

New member
Hall of Fame
Tet's ever disgraceful compulsion to introduce some issue into things by which he might turn a thing into, that he might then somehow undermine.

The guy would be a comedy of errors were he not so obviously spiritually corrupt; and what that implies about who he really is in his spirit.

For what I have just described as his tactic is exactly the very tactic described of the Adversary as early as Genesis 3.

I pity you, Tet. And your wife. And especially your children.

You are ever lower than low.

And that can not go well for your family under your corrupt influence.

I've been saying this for years. This fraud is so obsessed with MAD, he will resort to lie after lie, deception, sophistry, false accusations, hypocrisy, grade school antics, ...........to allegedly disprove dispensationalism, all the while, allowing others, who are of the "non dispensational" persuasion, to pervert the gospel of Christ, as long as they are not "dispies," because of his obsession, and lack of vertebrae/spine/backbone. He is a deceitful, hypocritical, spineless punk, and I make no apology in marking him as such.
 

Interplanner

New member
Danoh wrote:
Not surprisingly, as he was writing to the carnal (heart issue) Corinthians; he was talking about a heart or...a spiritual issue.


Yes, but it was Judaism, too.

Not all passages are to be read about what is the personal spiritual impact of this FIRST. Sometimes we need to know that he was referring to movements and thinking around him first, and then apply later, if we can.
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Not all passages are to be read about what is the personal spiritual impact of this FIRST. Sometimes we need to know that he was referring to movements and thinking around him first, and then apply later, if we can.

I concur with you in principle, however the FIRST shall be the LAST, and the LAST shall be the FIRST. This mountain top sermon lays the groundwork and constitution of the NHNE event, and provides many hard sayings, which when taken literally seem impossible, but if we contort our thinking to morph into a spirtual mindset these sayings can reverberate with your spirits and bring forth lasting modalities of performance on our part and instruction to others. Agreed?
 

Interplanner

New member
I concur with you in principle, however the FIRST shall be the LAST, and the LAST shall be the FIRST. This mountain top sermon lays the groundwork and constitution of the NHNE event, and provides many hard sayings, which when taken literally seem impossible, but if we contort our thinking to morph into a spirtual mindset these sayings can reverberate with your spirits and bring forth lasting modalities of performance on our part and instruction to others. Agreed?


I'm referring to the fact that he was speaking about Judaism and Judaizers in Little Asia, when writing 2 Cor 5. They shadowed him everywhere.
 
Top