ECT MUD interp flaw

Interplanner

New member
Acts 2 is not Ephesians 2:8-9 KJV! Peter told those folks to DO something for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38 KJV) looking forward that their sins may be blotted out (Acts 3:19-21 KJV) while Paul preached to believe something to be saved and that of course by the gospel by which we are saved 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV).

You need to get over wanting to interpret things (as you're horrible at it made evident even by your above post) and believe what saith the scripture. When did the prophets prophesy that grace should come unto Israel (another clue to you that this is different than Paul's preaching!)

1 Peter 1:7 That the trial of your faith, being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire, might be found unto praise and honour and glory at the appearing of Jesus Christ:

1 Peter 1:8 Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice with joy unspeakable and full of glory:

1 Peter 1:9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

1 Peter 1:10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

1 Peter 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.


This is just silly. since when was the atoning sacrifice of Christ for Israel or anyone for that matter (you know the 'lamb of God') "something we do?"

The goodness of God leads us to repentance--taught by both Peter and Paul.

You give me a headache with your fracturing the Bible 24x7. Who would be interested except someone who writes IRS regulations?
 

Interplanner

New member
As for the stupidity of 'when did the prophets say grace was coming?' (I can't really believe someone would ask that): 2 Cor 6:1+ (based on what just got said in ch 5...). It's a quote from Isaiah about a whole age that was coming... A whole time period.

I PETER 1:10: the prophets spoke of the grace that was coming...

You need to stop posting until you actually know your Bible. This MAD stuff is perpetuated by the self-perception of 'authority' by just being able to post on the internet.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
This is just silly. since when was the atoning sacrifice of Christ for Israel or anyone for that matter (you know the 'lamb of God') "something we do?"

The goodness of God leads us to repentance--taught by both Peter and Paul.

You give me a headache with your fracturing the Bible 24x7. Who would be interested except someone who writes IRS regulations?

Take a couple of Aspirins, unplug your Laptop and walk around the circumference of the earth a dozen times, then, start posting again. Don't forget to send us some postcards.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
As for the stupidity of 'when did the prophets say grace was coming?' (I can't really believe someone would ask that): 2 Cor 6:1+ (based on what just got said in ch 5...). It's a quote from Isaiah about a whole age that was coming... A whole time period.

I PETER 1:10: the prophets spoke of the grace that was coming...

You need to stop posting until you actually know your Bible. This MAD stuff is perpetuated by the self-perception of 'authority' by just being able to post on the internet.

At least you're no Genius. You've proved that over and over again.
 

Interplanner

New member
Either make a comment about what 2 cor 6:1 means or shut up. I thought this was a theology forum, not a place for you to protect your fragile ego and put others down.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
Either make a comment about what 2 cor 6:1 means or shut up. I thought this was a theology forum, not a place for you to protect your fragile ego and put others down.

You don't make the rules around these parts, pal. There's no reason to take you seriously. If there was, I'd debate you respectfully.
 

Interplanner

New member
Inter, is VEHEMENTLY against the Grace Gospel. (MAD) He's an enemy of the truth.


Since you consider yourself the paragon of virtue here, I thought sure you would see the problem: that you can't defend MAD so you slight the opposing person's personality.

Do you have anything real to say about I Pet 1:10+ or 2 Cor 6:1+? Obviously not. that is the problem here.
 

Interplanner

New member
Did you know that on the secular university campuses, they are doing the exact same thing you just did? Creating 'safe' zones where students cannot be asked certain questions that might disturb them or bother them?

Welcome to the real world of the marketplace of ideas. Plastic will melt in the heat really quick.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
Did you know that on the secular university campuses, they are doing the exact same thing you just did? Creating 'safe' zones where students cannot be asked certain questions that might disturb them or bother them?

Welcome to the real world of the marketplace of ideas. Plastic will melt in the heat really quick.

That's a coincidence. You both disturb and bother your fellow posters here.
 

Interplanner

New member
Explain to us the similarities?


Bizarre uses of plain scripture. If it says there is an anathema for saying there are two gospels, you say there are two gospels and that's just fine.

If "saved" in Rom 11 means justification by faith, you say it means a restored theocratic state in israel with the worship system and all. never mind what that does theologically to the letter to Hebrews, it is simply not what Paul meant. "Saved" was plainly defined in that section by the time you get there. He wanted Jews to work in the mission; he was not at all concerned about a restored theocratic state, nor was Christ, Acts 1.

If Acts 1 says that topic is none of our business, you make it the top priority of your business, trying to find it all the time in any possible passage.

If 2 Cor 6 and 1 Peter 1 say grace was announced by the prophets, a whole age of it, you say the prophets knew nothing of grace coming and Jesus didn't and Peter didn't; no one knew until Paul by surprise or mystery.

On and on. It's all because Ryrie said 2P2P must stand because it was the bedrock of D'ism, which he said must stand. Because it must. It must.
 

Grosnick Marowbe

New member
Hall of Fame
Bizarre uses of plain scripture. If it says there is an anathema for saying there are two gospels, you say there are two gospels and that's just fine.

If "saved" in Rom 11 means justification by faith, you say it means a restored theocratic state in israel with the worship system and all. never mind what that does theologically to the letter to Hebrews, it is simply not what Paul meant. "Saved" was plainly defined in that section by the time you get there. He wanted Jews to work in the mission; he was not at all concerned about a restored theocratic state, nor was Christ, Acts 1.

If Acts 1 says that topic is none of our business, you make it the top priority of your business, trying to find it all the time in any possible passage.

If 2 Cor 6 and 1 Peter 1 say grace was announced by the prophets, a whole age of it, you say the prophets knew nothing of grace coming and Jesus didn't and Peter didn't; no one knew until Paul by surprise or mystery.

On and on. It's all because Ryrie said 2P2P must stand because it was the bedrock of D'ism, which he said must stand. Because it must. It must.

:rotfl:
 
Top