ECT The eternal Gospel

[Interplanner]

Another example of a liar telling lies. We have enough examples already IP.

Rom 11:1-5 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:1) I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, [of] the tribe of Benjamin. (11:2) God hath not cast away his people which he foreknew. Wot ye not what the scripture saith of Elias? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel, saying, (11:3) Lord, they have killed thy prophets, and digged down thine altars; and I am left alone, and they seek my life. (11:4) But what saith the answer of God unto him? I have reserved to myself seven thousand men, who have not bowed the knee to [the image of] Baal. (11:5) Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. ​

And yet IP says that God has cast away His people.

Wrong as always. At least you're consistent.

yes (consistent) because the illustration that answers this the believing remnant. God doesn't forsake all of his people because those who believe who are part of the race will be blessed for their faith. It's very simple, really. The remnant, not the whole race. 'God does not show favoritism' means he fellowships with Gentiles who have faith and not with those Jews who do not have faith. And those groups may be reversed in that formula.

You are race based, instead of faith based. You consistently block the Bible from getting this message across. As does D'ism because it is race based, and thinks the OT is with its pal Judaism.

 

[Interplanner]

God fellowships with those who have faith; he has cast off those who do not, at least if THEY have decided they will never believe. He yearns for all to believe on the Son. For ALL.

 

[DAN P]

A couple of them are up above, Dan. also Acts 15:17-18: the Lord does these things / known from ancient time

Hi and as a GRAMMAR scholar , you should know the difference between the Geek PRO and APO !!

PRO means BEFORE !~!

APO means FROM !!

I am correct in EPH 1:4 and in 2 Tim 1:9

dan p

 

[Right Divider]

yes (consistent) because the illustration that answers this the believing remnant. God doesn't forsake all of his people because those who believe who are part of the race will be blessed for their faith. It's very simple, really. The remnant, not the whole race. 'God does not show favoritism' means he fellowships with Gentiles who have faith and not with those Jews who do not have faith. And those groups may be reversed in that formula.

Believing gentiles were always allowed to join WITH Israel.

In the dispensation of the grace of God there is NO difference. There was before and there will be again.

You are race based, instead of faith based.

I'm Bible based believing all that God is doing WHEN He is doing it.

You consistently block the Bible from getting this message across. As does D'ism because it is race based, and thinks the OT is with its pal Judaism.

Baloney, as usual.

 

[Interplanner]

Believing gentiles were always allowed to join WITH Israel.

In the dispensation of the grace of God there is NO difference. There was before and there will be again.


I'm Bible based believing all that God is doing WHEN He is doing it.


Baloney, as usual.

re joining Israel:
ahhh, but joining the race or joining those who believe? Huge question. Cowards will avoid it. The retroactive view of these things by the NT is that it was about those who believe, NOT THE RACE. Gal 3, Rom 4, 9.

dispensation
That's not why it exists now, and the retroactive view of the NT is that it always was about grace, and that Ninevites and Amorites and Rahabs could believe. God wanted the Amorites and Amalekites to believe for 400 years and then ended his offer. Gal 3, 4, Rom 4, 9. It always was about the mission of the Gospel, and the phase of Judaism was never intended to switch things as it did (Gal 3:17). It replaced the theology of the Gospel.

The reason Paul talks about a current age now is to ensure that his contacts in Judaism know its over. God never did have 2 programs going; that is a fraud. It is a fraud to force and squeeze it out of the NT.

It's always amusing how this race 'trump' effect carries on right into your post today. You make the grand claim that you know the Bible and render all it says, yet you trump all it says with the race of Israel, instead of faith. Comp Jn 1:13.

race-based:
every founding document of D'ism in the 1800s--Darby, Chafer, Scofield--will trump everything by race, the race of Israel. ONe of them thought the bible didnt' make sense without their system. Because they totally misunderstood the place of race. It never was about the race. The NT says so retroactively. Gal 3, 4, Rom 4, 9. Hebrews the Letter is to those who believe (that Israel), not to the race, although obviously there was overlap.

the difference
Judaism introduced the difference by replacing the theology of the Gospel. that's why it was there. They needed to make distinctions about the Amorite fertility perversion. But when there is no Amorite fertility perversion, you don't go on living as though the one thing you must really be distinct/holy about is Amorite fertility perversion!

 

[Right Divider]

re joining Israel:
ahhh, but joining the race or joining those who believe? Huge question. Cowards will avoid it. The retroactive view of these things by the NT is that it was about those who believe, NOT THE RACE. Gal 3, Rom 4, 9.

Believing Israel is still Israel.

dispensation
That's not why it exists now, and the retroactive view of the NT is that it always was about grace, and that Ninevites and Amorites and Rahabs could believe. God wanted the Amorites and Amalekites to believe for 400 years and then ended his offer. Gal 3, 4, Rom 4, 9. It always was about the mission of the Gospel, and the phase of Judaism was never intended to switch things as it did (Gal 3:17). It replaced the theology of the Gospel.

:rotfl:

The reason Paul talks about a current age now is to ensure that his contacts in Judaism know its over. God never did have 2 programs going; that is a fraud. It is a fraud to force and squeeze it out of the NT.

Heaven and earth.... sorry that you missed the memo.

It's always amusing how this race 'trump' effect carries on right into your post today. You make the grand claim that you know the Bible and render all it says, yet you trump all it says with the race of Israel, instead of faith. Comp Jn 1:13.

John 1:13 is in the CONTEXT of HIS PEOPLE..... which IN THAT CONTEXT is ISRAEL.

race-based:
every founding document of D'ism in the 1800s--Darby, Chafer, Scofield--will trump everything by race, the race of Israel. ONe of them thought the bible didnt' make sense without their system. Because they totally misunderstood the place of race. It never was about the race. The NT says so retroactively. Gal 3, 4, Rom 4, 9. Hebrews the Letter is to those who believe (that Israel), not to the race, although obviously there was overlap.

Sanfordianism must throw out, ignore or pervert vast amounts of scripture.

the difference
Judaism introduced the difference by replacing the theology of the Gospel. that's why it was there. They needed to make distinctions about the Amorite fertility perversion. But when there is no Amorite fertility perversion, you don't go on living as though the one thing you must really be distinct/holy about is Amorite fertility perversion!

You're nuts. Seek immediate medical attention.

Rev 21:9-14 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:9) And there came unto me one of the seven angels which had the seven vials full of the seven last plagues, and talked with me, saying, Come hither, I will shew thee the bride, the Lamb's wife. (21:10) And he carried me away in the spirit to a great and high mountain, and shewed me that great city, the holy Jerusalem, descending out of heaven from God, (21:11) Having the glory of God: and her light [was] like unto a stone most precious, even like a jasper stone, clear as crystal; (21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: (21:13) On the east three gates; on the north three gates; on the south three gates; and on the west three gates. (21:14) And the wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb. ​

 

[Interplanner]

"Believing Israel is still Israel"
Yes, Amen! That's why God has not forsaken his people, and that's how the calling and inheritance are without repentance. It's the believing ones. it always was! Not the race.

heaven and earth?
There is no such division in the NT. Eph 4. It's one unified fellowship. You may have noticed that the church / ecclesia is here on earth. SO is the one in Hebrews , which is about the faith community, not the race.

Just remember: 'not the race' and you'll get it

pervert Scripture:
you have no examples; I have 10 examples to your 1s.

the new Jerusalem:
there is no picture that works, but maybe you noticed: the foundations are the apostles. Last I checked, the foundations of Judaism were in conflict with the apostles. But maybe not; maybe Christian faith was never supposed to happen, and we are all supposed to belong to Judaism which replaced what was actually there in the OT.

Of course, you have coordinate the cartoon-imagery of that part of the Bible with the ordinary language like Gal 4 and Heb 12 in which it is full of believers. So the 'tribes' are actually different groups within the Christian fellowship, because it is most certainly Christians and fellowship.

You need to know what the NT says retroactively about the OT, before you step any further.

 

[Right Divider]

"Believing Israel is still Israel"
Yes, Amen! That's why God has not forsaken his people, and that's how the calling and inheritance are without repentance. It's the believing ones. it always was! Not the race.

heaven and earth?
There is no such division in the NT. Eph 4. It's one unified fellowship. You may have noticed that the church / ecclesia is here on earth. SO is the one in Hebrews , which is about the faith community, not the race.

Just remember: 'not the race' and you'll get it

pervert Scripture:
you have no examples; I have 10 examples to your 1s.

the new Jerusalem:
there is no picture that works, but maybe you noticed: the foundations are the apostles. Last I checked, the foundations of Judaism were in conflict with the apostles. But maybe not; maybe Christian faith was never supposed to happen, and we are all supposed to belong to Judaism which replaced what was actually there in the OT.

Of course, you have coordinate the cartoon-imagery of that part of the Bible with the ordinary language like Gal 4 and Heb 12 in which it is full of believers. So the 'tribes' are actually different groups within the Christian fellowship, because it is most certainly Christians and fellowship.

You need to know what the NT says retroactively about the OT, before you step any further.

Why do the gates in the NEW Jerusalem have the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel?

 

[Tambora]

"Believing Israel is still Israel"
Yes, Amen! That's why God has not forsaken his people, and that's how the calling and inheritance are without repentance. It's the believing ones. it always was! Not the race.

heaven and earth?
There is no such division in the NT. Eph 4. It's one unified fellowship. You may have noticed that the church / ecclesia is here on earth. SO is the one in Hebrews , which is about the faith community, not the race.

Just remember: 'not the race' and you'll get it

pervert Scripture:
you have no examples; I have 10 examples to your 1s.

the new Jerusalem:
there is no picture that works, but maybe you noticed: the foundations are the apostles. Last I checked, the foundations of Judaism were in conflict with the apostles. But maybe not; maybe Christian faith was never supposed to happen, and we are all supposed to belong to Judaism which replaced what was actually there in the OT.

Of course, you have coordinate the cartoon-imagery of that part of the Bible with the ordinary language like Gal 4 and Heb 12 in which it is full of believers. So the 'tribes' are actually different groups within the Christian fellowship, because it is most certainly Christians and fellowship.

You need to know what the NT says retroactively about the OT, before you step any further.

Not the rack, huh.

Who dis?

Romans 11:28 KJV
(28) As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

 

[Interplanner]

Not the rack, huh.

Who dis?

Romans 11:28 KJV
(28) As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sakes.

Obviously, the first are not enemies because they believe--if they do. And Everyone is loved for the father's sake: in your Seed, ALL THE NATIONS of the earth will be blessed. The promise is for all those who are far off and those who are near--the promised forgiveness. Acts 2:39.

RD started right: it IS about the remnant, and the remnant shows that some are loved. Paul would not embrace the Christ-denying Jew; vice-verca, that person would be throwing rocks at him.

That is a huge departure from blanket approval or disapproval.

Review what old-covenant Prager says and you'll see it: 'A Jew can be an atheist and still be a Jew; but a Christian can't without utterly changing his behavior. I'd apply the behavior rule to Judaism, BUT IT DOESNT' APPLY.' Can you not see that we are not in league with Judaism on this? We can't be. And the NT retroactively affirms that: it never was about the whole race. It was about believers. It never was about the land, but God did use the geography strategically as it had been since the catastrophes of Noah and Babel.

Heb 11 ends: they did not receive, so that ONLY with us would the be blessed by the 'perfection' of Hebrews--the removal of the guilt of sin. NOT something off in the future. Hebrews is not about the land and is not about the race, it is about believers, which is why we can break STP's fav rules and read it for our own edification.

ONLY with us means IN CHRIST, where it was going all along. Not in the land.

 

[Tambora]

Obviously, the first are not enemies because they believe

It is the same "they" in the verse, not a different "they".

 

[Interplanner]

It is the remnant.

our task is to convert them from Judaism, not to join them!

 

[Interplanner]

I wasn't as alert on that I should have been:

"They" are the same they, yes, but I see no logical or contextual reason why it connects to the land. That is the a priori mentality of D'ism, and it is a fraud. Look at how Rom 11 resolves, how the Isaiah quote is already fulfilled and God has already dispensed mercy to both parties. There is no land involved. That is the fraud of D'ism. It starts with that belief and then nestles a few texts around that belief.

'They are loved' does not automatically connect to or involve the land! Only in the minds of D'ists who said the Bible does not makes sense until D'ism arrived--Chafer, Darby, Scofield, Ryrie. Only in the minds of D'ists who also manipulate 'saved' in 11:26 to mean 'total old covenant restoration.' Not for me, no thanks. I'll stick with Rom 9's 4 quotes (24-30) and 15's 4 quotes (9-12).

The stronghold of D'ism continues to supplant the texts and I will be here until I can stop it.

All of those from the nations who believe are meant by 'In your Seed, all the nations will be blessed.'

In D'ism, they persecute you if you dislodge the future land of the old covenant restoration, and say that you are self-centered for believing the Scripture is about the salvation of mankind from sin.

In the Bible, the Christians were persecuted for not agreeing with Judaism, and were said to be opposed to the temple for preaching the Gospel. See the similarities?

 

[Right Divider]

It is the remnant.

So the remnant are enemies of the gospel?

Rom 11:28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.
​

our task is to convert them from Judaism, not to join them!

Our task is to capitalize the first word of a sentence, even if we are just hobbying.

Our task is to believe every word in the Word of God.

Rev 21:12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
​

Why do the gates of the NEW Jerusalem have the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel?

 

[Right Divider]

I wasn't as alert on that I should have been:

"They" are the same they, yes, but I see no logical or contextual reason why it connects to the land. That is the a priori mentality of D'ism, and it is a fraud. Look at how Rom 11 resolves, how the Isaiah quote is already fulfilled and God has already dispensed mercy to both parties. There is no land involved. That is the fraud of D'ism. It starts with that belief and then nestles a few texts around that belief.

'They are loved' does not automatically connect to or involve the land! Only in the minds of D'ists who said the Bible does not makes sense until D'ism arrived--Chafer, Darby, Scofield, Ryrie. Only in the minds of D'ists who also manipulate 'saved' in 11:26 to mean 'total old covenant restoration.' Not for me, no thanks. I'll stick with Rom 9's 4 quotes (24-30) and 15's 4 quotes (9-12).

The stronghold of D'ism continues to supplant the texts and I will be here until I can stop it.

All of those from the nations who believe are meant by 'In your Seed, all the nations will be blessed.'

In D'ism, they persecute you if you dislodge the future land of the old covenant restoration, and say that you are self-centered for believing the Scripture is about the salvation of mankind from sin.

In the Bible, the Christians were persecuted for not agreeing with Judaism, and were said to be opposed to the temple for preaching the Gospel. See the similarities?

If you believed the Bible, you would not be so confused. This passage of Isaiah is parallel to Revelation 21.

Isa 60:16-22 (AKJV/PCE)​

(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. (60:17) For brass I will bring gold, and for iron I will bring silver, and for wood brass, and for stones iron: I will also make thy officers peace, and thine exactors righteousness. (60:18) Violence shall no more be heard in thy land, wasting nor destruction within thy borders; but thou shalt call thy walls Salvation, and thy gates Praise. (60:19) The sun shall be no more thy light by day; neither for brightness shall the moon give light unto thee: but the LORD shall be unto thee an everlasting light, and thy God thy glory. (60:20) Thy sun shall no more go down; neither shall thy moon withdraw itself: for the LORD shall be thine everlasting light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended. (60:21) Thy people also [shall be] all righteous: they shall inherit the land for ever, the branch of my planting, the work of my hands, that I may be glorified. (60:22) A little one shall become a thousand, and a small one a strong nation: I the LORD will hasten it in his time. ​

Note the "land for ever".

Rev 21:22-26 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:22) And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it. (21:23) And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb [is] the light thereof. (21:24) And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. (21:25) And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there. (21:26) And they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.
​

Note the "kings of the earth" in verse 24. These are the SAME ones as in Isaiah 60:16

Also take special note of THIS earlier in Rev 21:

Rev 21:12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
​

Believe it ALL.

 

[Interplanner]

So the remnant are enemies of the gospel?

Rom 11:28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes.
​

Our task is to capitalize the first word of a sentence, even if we are just hobbying.

Our task is to believe every word in the Word of God.

Rev 21:12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel:
​

Why do the gates of the NEW Jerusalem have the names of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel?

They:
The ones who don't believe who are Jewish are enemies... duh... He is not blanket this or that.

Judaism:
getting concerned that you are part of Judaism as a D'ist, huh?

Israel:
which Israel? The Israel of God? The 2nd Israel of Rom 9:6? when does a picture break down? Is a post card of Yosemite the same thing as Yosemite? Why are the foundations the apostles--the apostles Judaism would prefer to see dead? Why would ALL the tribes be founded on ALL the apostles, unless the thing was just a suggestive image for us to see a unified Bible, not unified by a restoration of the old covenant land, but a restoration of the living temple, which Christ is. He is both that city image and is the temple himself, in 21:22.

You read some of the Bible that you claim allegiance to, but you don't read enough.

 

[Right Divider]

It is the same "they" in the verse, not a different "they".

Tambora was referring to Roman 11:28

Rom 11:28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes. ​

​

To which YOU replied:

It is the remnant.

They:
The ones who don't believe who are Jewish are enemies... duh... He is not blanket this or that.

Duh indeed! Your confusion is so immense that you don't even know what YOU'RE saying... let alone anyone else.

 

[Right Divider]

Israel:
which Israel? The Israel of God? The 2nd Israel of Rom 9:6? when does a picture break down? Is a post card of Yosemite the same thing as Yosemite? Why are the foundations the apostles--the apostles Judaism would prefer to see dead? Why would ALL the tribes be founded on ALL the apostles, unless the thing was just a suggestive image for us to see a unified Bible, not unified by a restoration of the old covenant land, but a restoration of the living temple, which Christ is. He is both that city image and is the temple himself, in 21:22.

You read some of the Bible that you claim allegiance to, but you don't read enough.

Rev 21:12 (AKJV/PCE)​

(21:12) And had a wall great and high, [and] had twelve gates, and at the gates twelve angels, and names written thereon, which are [the names] of the twelve tribes of the children of Israel: ​

 

[Interplanner]

on 11:28, if you'll just go back to v7, you'll see that it never blankets Israel, even when talking about election. "The others were hardened" which btw sets up the end of the chapter.
Also notice that what was going on in Paul's appeal was to some how save some of them. "Save" does not ever mean a restoration of old covenant Israel in Romans, and he knew that it would only be some of them.

that is why the 'kai houtos' (in this way, and so) with this partial hardening going on, all of the genuine, believing Israel will be saved.

 

[Interplanner]

Tambora was referring to Roman 11:28

Rom 11:28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(11:28) As concerning the gospel, [they are] enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, [they are] beloved for the fathers' sakes. ​

​

To which YOU replied:



Duh indeed! Your confusion is so immense that you don't even know what YOU'RE saying... let alone anyone else.

Except that my view assimilates v7 and 14 instead of being a barrage of D'ism-speak.