ECT The Mission Launched at Pentecost

[Right Divider]

??? Ephesians is in. Are you crazy or just appearing to be so?

Your idiotic and illogical statement is that Ephesians is somehow MORE important than that the rest of scripture because it was "the most widely circulated".

Thats because the widest circulated letter said there was just one people of God in Christ, and because 2P2P is a phantomistic doctrine that never shows in NT thinking

Does this mean that it somehow invalidates the rest of scripture?

Your book learning has made you MAD! (as in crazy).

P.S. This also goes for your "if it's not repeated in Matt -- Rev., it must have been cancelled" theory.

 

[Right Divider]

Yes, he wanted workers in his mission from anywhere he could get them. That's the entity, going forward, that was to succeed and flourish, not a Judaistic theocracy. That was never the plan.

Wrong again Mr. ToxicBoy

 

[SimpleMan77]

And YET Jesus did NOT yet give up on them.

Luke 23:34 (AKJV/PCE)​

(23:34) ¶ Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do. And they parted his raiment, and cast lots. ​

And YET Jesus STILL sent His disciples to preach to Israel.

Paul never gave up on them. Read Acts 28. Wherever Paul went it was always offered to the Jew first, then the Gentile.

God still hasn't given up on them. There are Jews that still get saved today.

What in the world are you talking about?


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

Wrong again Mr. ToxicBoy

Actually the favorite proof text of MAD about 'only to the lost sheep of israel' has a woman who has more faith than most in Israel and is complimented for it!

There is nothing wrong with the statement in question. You see, the message itself has its own evangelistic power, so all a person needs to do is repeat the message, no matter what he is like, and there is evangelistic value to it.

I would pay closer attention to what you are saying rather than to trying to put down or be right. Wouldn't it be great if believers actually found common ground?

 

[SimpleMan77]

So are you saying that the reference to Israel in this verse is speaking of the Body of Christ?:

"And I will bring them (Israel), and they shall dwell in the midst of Jerusalem: and they shall be my people, and I will be their God, in truth and in righteousness...And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; so will I save you, and ye shall be a blessing...In those days it shall come to pass, that ten men shall take hold out of all languages of the nations, even shall take hold of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you: for we have heard that God is with you" (Zech.8:8,13,23).

Since when was the Body of Christ a curse?

And if the house of Israel refers to the Body of Christ then what is the identity of the house of Judah?

There are prophecies that say "Israel" that refer to the natural Israel, and some that refer to "the Israel of God". There are prophecies that refer to both. Some have taken place, and some are yet to come. Some have taken place already, but will take place again on another level.

God knows which ones fit in which category, but he hasn't told me or you.

What is true is that Jesus came to offer salvation to the Jews, but He knew they would reject it as a nation. That always had, with only a remnant accepting it. His master plan was to wait until after His resurrection, then send His missionaries to all nations. He did that.

Will He in the future especially reach to the nation of Israel? It seems so. But they'll have to come in through the same door that we have. Through Jesus Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

There are prophecies that say "Israel" that refer to the natural Israel, and some that refer to "the Israel of God". There are prophecies that refer to both. Some have taken place, and some are yet to come. Some have taken place already, but will take place again on another level.

God knows which ones fit in which category, but he hasn't told me or you.

What is true is that Jesus came to offer salvation to the Jews, but He knew they would reject it as a nation. That always had, with only a remnant accepting it. His master plan was to wait until after His resurrection, then send His missionaries to all nations. He did that.

Will He in the future especially reach to the nation of Israel? It seems so. But they'll have to come in through the same door that we have. Through Jesus Christ.


That's right on tne ending there: if there was a teacher in Israel now who was echoing Romans, hey, I'd be all for it.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

There are prophecies that say "Israel" that refer to the natural Israel, and some that refer to "the Israel of God". There are prophecies that refer to both. Some have taken place, and some are yet to come. Some have taken place already, but will take place again on another level.

God knows which ones fit in which category, but he hasn't told me or you.

What is true is that Jesus came to offer salvation to the Jews, but He knew they would reject it as a nation. That always had, with only a remnant accepting it. His master plan was to wait until after His resurrection, then send His missionaries to all nations. He did that.

Will He in the future especially reach to the nation of Israel? It seems so. But they'll have to come in through the same door that we have. Through Jesus Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

That's a great final line. If there was a teacher in Israel right now who was echoing Romans, hey, I'd love to hear it.

 

[Danoh]

There are prophecies that say "Israel" that refer to the natural Israel, and some that refer to "the Israel of God". There are prophecies that refer to both. Some have taken place, and some are yet to come. Some have taken place already, but will take place again on another level.

God knows which ones fit in which category, but he hasn't told me or you.

What is true is that Jesus came to offer salvation to the Jews, but He knew they would reject it as a nation. That always had, with only a remnant accepting it. His master plan was to wait until after His resurrection, then send His missionaries to all nations. He did that.

Will He in the future especially reach to the nation of Israel? It seems so. But they'll have to come in through the same door that we have. Through Jesus Christ.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

Read into it what you do, nevertheless "the Israel OF GOD" does NOT refer to the Body of Christ.

 

[Right Divider]

Paul never gave up on them. Read Acts 28. Wherever Paul went it was always offered to the Jew first, then the Gentile.

Not after Acts 28 he wasn't.

The Jew first and also the Gentile is NOT the speaking about the gospel of the grace of God where there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. It was talking about the time when Israel was primary to God's plans on the earth. It was later that God revealed TO and THROUGH Paul the dispensation of the grace of God and it's a limited time offer. Israel will be restored.

God still hasn't given up on them. There are Jews that still get saved today.

TODAY they get saved as members of the body of Christ, if they believe the gospel of the grace of God.
If they insist on the gospel of the kingdom, as most of churchianity does, then they will remain lost.

What in the world are you talking about?

Acts 1-8 primarily.

 

[Interplanner]

RD wrote:
The Jew first and also the Gentile is NOT the speaking about the gospel of the grace of God where there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. It was talking about the time when Israel was primary to God's plans on the earth. It was later that God revealed TO and THROUGH Paul the dispensation of the grace of God and it's a limited time offer. Israel will be restored.

Here's the mistakes with this.
1, the reason for starting with Israel is the familiarity. By raising up missionaries from them, he didn't have to 'start over' on several things. It was never another gospel, and was never limited to israel and was not about Israel's domination or another restoration.
2, if you read Paul right in rom 4 and Gal 3, the blessing to the Gentiles always was the reason for dealing with israel, not a 2nd plan. anyone with any attention reading the Bible will see that ch 3 is connected to ch 12 because of a promise or redeemer. It would make the Bible very choppy reading if the two had nothing to do with each other.
3, Paul realized the plan much later but that is because he had been reading the OT 'kata sarka' or 'in the ordinary sense.' He found out that if read 'in christ' everything was already there; it had to be stripped of Judaism's layers and thoughts. that's why the quote from Amos 9 in Acts 15 includes the part about the Gentiles being saved 'known for ages.'
4, again, there is no reason now in light of Christ to restore Israel separately from what has happened in Christ. this would divide the church. No NT passage about the 2nd coming mentions anything about it when referring to the day of God's judgement; instead things move very swiftly to the NHNE. Many, many OT prophetic pictures are about the NHNE, not another restored Israel. Especially the end of Isaiah, where it is explicit.

 

[Right Divider]

Actually the favorite proof text of MAD about 'only to the lost sheep of israel' has a woman who has more faith than most in Israel and is complimented for it!

So what. Jesus respected gentiles that had faith and put Israel first.

Read the passage without your BLINDERS on.

Matt 15:21-28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(15:21) ¶ Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. (15:22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, [thou] Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. (15:23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. (15:24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (15:25) Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. (15:26) But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast [it] to dogs. (15:27) And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.(15:28) Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great [is] thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
​

• 
  [*=1]At first Jesus would not answer her EVEN ONE WORD.
  [*=1]Jesus called her a DOG (she was a gentile dog).
  [*=1]The "children" that Jesus is referring to are Israel.
  [*=1]When she worshiped Him and put Israel FIRST (willing to eat the crumbs from THEIR table), THEN Jesus praised her faith and healed her daughter.

No rocket surgery there.​

There is nothing wrong with the statement in question. You see, the message itself has its own evangelistic power, so all a person needs to do is repeat the message, no matter what he is like, and there is evangelistic value to it.

More of you double-speak gobblety-gook.

I would pay closer attention to what you are saying rather than to trying to put down or be right. Wouldn't it be great if believers actually found common ground?

Become a believer and we'll have lots of common ground.

Instead, you're enhanced by some voodoo guru of some sort and make tons of ridiculous perversions of the scripture. Sorry, but I have nothing in common with that.

 

[Interplanner]

So what. Jesus respected gentiles that had faith and put Israel first.

Read the passage without your BLINDERS on.

Matt 15:21-28 (AKJV/PCE)​

(15:21) ¶ Then Jesus went thence, and departed into the coasts of Tyre and Sidon. (15:22) And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, [thou] Son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil. (15:23) But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us. (15:24) But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. (15:25) Then came she and worshipped him, saying, Lord, help me. (15:26) But he answered and said, It is not meet to take the children's bread, and to cast [it] to dogs. (15:27) And she said, Truth, Lord: yet the dogs eat of the crumbs which fall from their masters' table.(15:28) Then Jesus answered and said unto her, O woman, great [is] thy faith: be it unto thee even as thou wilt. And her daughter was made whole from that very hour.
​

• 
  [*=1]At first Jesus would not answer her EVEN ONE WORD.
  [*=1]Jesus called her a DOG (she was a gentile dog).
  [*=1]The "children" that Jesus is referring to are Israel.
  [*=1]When she worshiped Him and put Israel FIRST (willing to eat the crumbs from THEIR table), THEN Jesus praised her faith and healed her daughter.

No rocket surgery there.​

More of you double-speak gobblety-gook.


Become a believer and we'll have lots of common ground.

Instead, you're enhanced by some voodoo guru of some sort and make tons of ridiculous perversions of the scripture. Sorry, but I have nothing in common with that.

There is no 'worship Israel' in the NT and I don't accept that her role-playing is support of that. She's had to learn how to be treated by them. You surely must be aware of the prejudice of Jews against the rest of the world at the time. You sound like you slurp it up.

The Gospel that God forgives sins through what happened in Christ is not gobblegook or doublespeak. You are just tone deaf. Anyone who can express that statement is spreading the Gospel, and as you know from Phil 1 some people did it unwittingly and for the wrong reasons; but the Gospel still spread! You are being pompous and obtuse.

A believer believes that God was in Christ resolving mankinds debt of sin. You add to that the theological "works" of believing about 5 items of your theology. No thanks, its nonsense. And it does not 'save' a person to believe it. You have no business saying I'm not a believer. I'm sure that you are.

 

[SimpleMan77]

Not after Acts 28 he wasn't.

The Jew first and also the Gentile is NOT the speaking about the gospel of the grace of God where there is NEITHER Jew NOR Greek. It was talking about the time when Israel was primary to God's plans on the earth. It was later that God revealed TO and THROUGH Paul the dispensation of the grace of God and it's a limited time offer. Israel will be restored.


TODAY they get saved as members of the body of Christ, if they believe the gospel of the grace of God.
If they insist on the gospel of the kingdom, as most of churchianity does, then they will remain lost.


Acts 1-8 primarily.

There never was a "Kingdom Gospel" and a "Grace Gospel". There was an incomplete Grace Gospel, one that only dealt with repentance before Jesus died, and then became complete once Jesus was crucified, buried, resurrected, and the Holy Ghost was given.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Right Divider]

There is no 'worship Israel' in the NT

I never said that, so either:

• You are making a false accusation.
• Your reading comprehension is below 2nd grade level.

and I don't accept that her role-playing is support of that.

What you "accept" and "don't accept" are nearly always wrong. Big surprise there.

She's had to learn how to be treated by them.

BACKWARD ALERT!!!!

You surely must be aware of the prejudice of Jews against the rest of the world at the time.

Are you including the LORD Who would not even say ONE work to her?

You sound like you slurp it up.

You're a knucklehead.

The Gospel that God forgives sins through what happened in Christ is not gobblegook or doublespeak.

YOUR convoluted fairy tales are the D-S and the G-G.

You are just tone deaf. Anyone who can express that statement is spreading the Gospel, and as you know from Phil 1 some people did it unwittingly and for the wrong reasons; but the Gospel still spread! You are being pompous and obtuse.

A believer believes that God was in Christ resolving mankinds debt of sin. You add to that the theological "works" of believing about 5 items of your theology. No thanks, its nonsense. And it does not 'save' a person to believe it. You have no business saying I'm not a believer. I'm sure that you are.

:juggle:
I was actually talking about you not being a BIBLE BELIEVER. You never take it for what it says. You ALWAYS have some outside source that "interprets" the scripture. That's why you're constantly wrong and often completely backwards.

 

[Interplanner]

There never was a "Kingdom Gospel" and a "Grace Gospel". There was an incomplete Grace Gospel, one that only dealt with repentance before Jesus died, and then became complete once Jesus was crucified, buried, resurrected, and the Holy Ghost was given.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

Sir, the Gospel is not something the believer does. The Gospel is the announcement that there is forgiveness from God in Christ. This is why the first miracle, done intentionally to 'prove' Christ, is proof that he has authority to forgive sins, ie, that he and God are one on that.

"In Christ" means in the historic event of his whole life, which had that purpose of supplying the righteousness of God on our behalf, known since Gen 3 and seen by Abraham.

 

[Right Divider]

There never was a "Kingdom Gospel" and a "Grace Gospel". There was an incomplete Grace Gospel, one that only dealt with repentance before Jesus died, and then became complete once Jesus was crucified, buried, resurrected, and the Holy Ghost was given.

Your argument is against scripture; so why don't you go take it up with the LORD?

Matt 4:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:23) ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
​

I thought that you believed Jesus.

 

[SimpleMan77]

Your argument is against scripture; so why don't you go take it up with the LORD?

Matt 4:23 (AKJV/PCE)​

(4:23) ¶ And Jesus went about all Galilee, teaching in their synagogues, and preaching the gospel of the kingdom, and healing all manner of sickness and all manner of disease among the people.
​

I thought that you believed Jesus.

It was all one Gospel.

Gospel of the Kingdom
Gospel of the Kingdom of God
Gospel of Jesus Christ
Gospel of the Grace of God
Gospel of God
Gospel of His Son
Gospel of Christ
Gospel of Peace
My (Paul's) Gospel
Christ's Gospel
Our Gospel
Gospel of your Salvation
Gospel of the Blessed God
Everlasting Gospel

ALL SYNONYMOUS TERMS. Paul called it the "Gospel of the grace of God" one time, but called it the "Gospel of Jesus Christ" or "Gospel of God" over and over. That's what the other Apostles called it also.

No wonder Paul called it the same as Peter. The MESSAGE WAS IDENTICAL!


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Right Divider]

It was all one Gospel.

Gospel of the Kingdom
Gospel of the Kingdom of God
Gospel of Jesus Christ
Gospel of the Grace of God
Gospel of God
Gospel of His Son
Gospel of Christ
Gospel of Peace
My (Paul's) Gospel
Christ's Gospel
Our Gospel
Gospel of your Salvation
Gospel of the Blessed God
Everlasting Gospel

ALL SYNONYMOUS TERMS. Paul called it the "Gospel of the grace of God" one time, but called it the "Gospel of Jesus Christ" or "Gospel of God" over and over. That's what the other Apostles called it also.

No wonder Paul called it the same as Peter. The MESSAGE WAS IDENTICAL!\

:noway:

 

[SimpleMan77]

:noway:

Peter said that he preached the "Gospel of God"

Paul said, over and over, that he preached the "Gospel of God".

Did they preach the same thing? Either titles of the Gospel here mean they were preaching the same thing or not.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

 

[Interplanner]

Peter said that he preached the "Gospel of God"

Paul said, over and over, that he preached the "Gospel of God".

Did they preach the same thing? Either titles of the Gospel here mean they were preaching the same thing or not.


Sent from my iPhone using TOL

MADs are struggling with the predicament 2P2P has put them in. One way they solve it is by having 2 gospels. But then they don't think that's two programs.