ECT No one says reading Ryrie is 'man-worship'

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
I had my head cut off this week by the 2P2P experts here at TOL ECT who are mad, and said that referring to anything outside the Bible or any authors outside the Bible was sinful 'man-worship.' (The books were dusty but the people were not).

But notice how no one calls it 'man-worship' when referring to the theology propangandist Charles Ryrie of Dallas Theological Seminary and his first coining the expression 2 peoples, 2 programs! No, that's not man worship at all.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
The point still stands that all 2P2Pers are about is 2P2P. They defend it with all the 'christian' amunition they can find: cursed are those who read any other books!
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
He cashed the whole concept. Half of what you think is Ryrie. Enjoy.
Click to expand...

Speaking strictly of human teachers, and not including Paul, it goes back at least as far as Darby who also taught the absolute distinction between covenant Israel and the Body of Christ. As did Scofield, Pettingill, Ironside and many others who well predate Ryrie.

You are far too ignorant to have started this thread. You should close it in shame, if you have any.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
musterion said:
It is 100% defensible from Paul's letters. The books are simply commentary.

You are embarrassingly ignorant.
Click to expand...



Do you seriously think I think any different? Put out a point, but don't say what you just said. "Saved" in Romans is never a Davidic theocracy. That's why ch 11 is not about the nation being saved.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
musterion said:
You are wrong. Get your facts straight. Stop humiliating yourself.
Click to expand...


I'm not at all, you just don't know how to discuss and give and take. I gave you a Rom 11 fact and you can't overthrow it. Grow up to it.

Here's #2 from earlier in the day: the end of Rom 11 is in future tense in the Isaiah quote, because CHRIST AND PAUL WAS IN THAT FUTURE. The 2P2P gentleman who was weilding this new found future-tense skill said what he did because 2P2P ALWAYS THINKS WE, NOW, AND ISRAEL, NOW, ARE THE FUTURE THAT ALL OF THE OT IS ABOUT. It is seldom about Christ, except a verse or two about a virgin birth here and there.

"They are just commentaries" is your denial of man-worship on your side.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
I undermine you, who identifies yourself as having the word of God, of having the best grip on the word of God, but it is just 2P2P.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
musterion said:
Luke 19:44 destroyed you when it was written, you cheap traffic scamming hack.
Click to expand...


I have no idea what you mean. It's just another 'victory' self-congratulation that you guys don't explain, I suspect because it can easily fall apart.

I don't understand the anger. If it meant losing something vital about christ I could understand the anger, but some episodes of Judaism in modern times are not essential or vital about Christ as found in the gospel. Gosh, out of the poverty of the heart the mouth curses!
 
musterion

musterion

Well-known member
I don't believe that he is obsessed. If he was really serious he wouldn't repeatedly make Tet look smart. He'd try to actually know what he's talking about.

This seems more like a clumsy, desperate business venture. Notice his signature link.

He's at perhaps the #1 mid-Acts discussion board of the internet (at least as far as I've seen). He's the equivalent of a traveling snake oil salesman who takes a dump in the middle of someone's living room, then when they chase him into the street he hopes they stop by his snake oil wagon parked at the curb. It's all about traffic and hits, and money. Awhile back I think I found him running this same scam elsewhere.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
See? You call reading Keller man-worship but reading Ryrie is 'just good commentary'? That's how flawed all your thinking is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top