ECT The Two Programs of 2P2P Don't Meet

Danoh

New member
It's not discernment, it is the inability to speak exactly about a passage. Danoh seldom does. 10 paragraphs about a TALKING about a passage, but not a paragraph about a passage. What he studies is me, not the passage. That's why all the books he also quotes (against his prohibition) are also from seminaries at some point.

What I study is how perception works and how it might aid or get in the way of reading a passage right.

You just happen to be the guinea pig in my posts about that to you :chuckle:

Others are in my posts about that to them.

Others and I am in my journal entries about that to myself.

And when I am reading a book and or hearing a preaching, I am studying said individual's manner of perception as indicated by the recurrent pattern of their assertions.

It is referred to as behavioral modeling - the study of how things within any behavior interact with one another that results in their result; the epistomolgy upon which one bases one's epistemology about a thing, to begin with.

I do the same with the writer's of Scripture.

Thus, why I know, not hope, not think, not guess, not wonder - but know - that you are married to a perceptual system of endlessly perpetual cluelessness.

You take issue because you think I am talking about you :chuckle:

I am actually taking about modes of perception that get in the way of seeing any passage of Scripture for what it is actually saying.

O the vanity :chuckle:
 

Interplanner

New member
Basic Principles of the Paragraph Containing Gal 3.

1, the every day example. Back in 14 he made a purposive statement that he believed needed to be explained. it was:

Christ did this in order that the blessing God promised to Abraham might be given to the Gentiles, so that we might recieve the promise of the Spirit --which is how the mission gets done.

"This" was the death on the cross.

Now the every day example comes about the Promise. When two men agree and sign off on the agreement, the terms have to be met. The "two men" are God and Christ. How does Christ get the gift of the Spirit to give to men to further spread the mission of the Gospel? Through his agreement with God. The so-called Abrahamic covenant was actually between God and Christ the Seed. The agreement was not with Many but with One person.

2, The Seed. With Israel as an ethne out of the picture in the agreement, Paul was showing that the Promise was (indirectly) for all mankind, for all nations, because it was not for one nation. It was a matter of clearing up who the "two men" were.

3, V 17 then opens with 'touto de lego' because he knows it is going to be remarkable that Israel was not the other party of the covenant often called the covenant with Abraham. But it is fundamental. This is why the Gospel blesses all people no matter what ethne they are . He knows he needs to re-express, or re-phrase this fundamental assertion, so here it comes:

The Law cannot break that agreement and void God's promise to Christ

Who cares? JUDAISM cares! That's what Paul grew up in, grew out of, and now battles. Judaism now says that the covenant was with Many and that many was Israel. So Law in these next verses (18, 19) means people fulfilling the terms of Moses law as though they were the other party in the agreement--WHICH THEY ARE NOT! Christ was the other party. (He has no concern here to point out that Christ fulfilled the Law as in Rom 10:4).

18b is showing that it couldn't have been Abraham's obedience to law, which matters a lot to his countrymen in Judaism. It had to be through a promised person, Christ. That would be true of Abraham and current Judaism.

If anything was to improve the clarity of 18, I would say it was "because God had promised it to Christthat he gave it to Abraham. That is the sense. Likewise in 17a. God made a covenant (with Christ) and promised to keep it. The topic here is not the gift of righteousness for Abraham here, but the gift of the Spirit, as it was in v14 and originally in 3:2-4.

4, the absence of the Many. The Many disappear from reference at v16 but that is the official declaration of the apostle. The problem of D'ism for years has been whether they will accept this. Apparently for Judaism as well, because the plain language of 17 seemed mistaken to them. The only way it clears up is if the parties are God and Christ, and if the thing promised is the Spirit so that the mission of the Gospel proceeds and succeeds. But even after mentioning the Law, Paul repeats that the covenant was not with the Many but with the Seed, v19.

5, the parallel in Acts 13. The closest comparable passage about this is Paul in Acts 13 quoting Isaiah about the promises to David. They are given to Christ. That's how they get fulfilled. There is no expectation of their fulfillment in a sense which would be like the ancient past of Israel. They also exist for the mission of the Gospel.
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Perhaps, you have difficulty articulating your thoughts into words?

He talks a lot, but none of it changes this:


1. The earth is an inheritance
2. The New Jerusalem from heaven is an inheritance
3. Heaven itself is an inheritance

And, he only qualifies for #3.

And, he cannot make them all one no matter how badly (like Satan) he wants to.
 

Interplanner

New member
He talks a lot, but none of it changes this:


1. The earth is an inheritance
2. The New Jerusalem from heaven is an inheritance
3. Heaven itself is an inheritance




And, he only qualifies for #3.

And, he cannot make them all one no matter how badly (like Satan) he wants to.



There are not three types of believers going to three places if that is what you mean. yes, they are all one in the NHNE because the temple and the light in that city are God and Christ. That is why it can be tasted already.
 

Danoh

New member
Reminds me of that old joke - "there are only two types of people in the world: those who say there are only two types of people in the world; and those who say there are not" :chuckle:
 

Interplanner

New member
Maybe you just don't recognize it


Hope you concentrate on the essentials. You're apparently going to make a whole case now for multi-heavens based on some odd reference in 2 Cor 9 or some such.

Well, you better not be dividing up the church, in which there is no slave, free, male, female, Jew, Gentile, etc. But then again you are extremely weak on Gal 3, right?
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
Hope you concentrate on the essentials. You're apparently going to make a whole case now for multi-heavens based on some odd reference in 2 Cor 9 or some such.

Well, you better not be dividing up the church, in which there is no slave, free, male, female, Jew, Gentile, etc. But then again you are extremely weak on Gal 3, right?

:chuckle:

Land forever
Heavenly city forever
Heaven forever

It is in your Bible. Be a believer, not an interpreter.
 

Interplanner

New member
:chuckle:

Land forever
Heavenly city forever
Heaven forever

It is in your Bible. Be a believer, not an interpreter.


It is not in the NT, forever. Be a believer. Heb 11. They weren't thinking of Israel, and they weren't thinking of Persia/Babylon. They were thinking of heaven and the living witnesses, the cloud. Which both Paul and Hebrews speak of as close and dear.

There is no repetition of Gen 17 in the NT; instead there is the inheriting of the world (Rom 4) which is the NHNE. There is no need for any "land" on this earth. There is nothing geo-political that needs to take place to complete the 2nd coming in judgement.

Be a believer, not an interpreter.
 

Interplanner

New member
It's in your Bible, and the land promises are never altered in the NT.


You can't just say that. If you have reasons, give them. That's my point. There are no reasons for it. There is nothing "missing" about the Bible or apologetics or background that "needs" things to happen in Israel. Certainly not for the 2nd coming in judgement which was originally thought to happen right after the DofJ.

There is not one clear NT passage saying so, which is why you have not posted any. No NT comment on OT "promises" either. Never. The closest you can get is the entire world of Rom 4 re Abraham, which is the world to come, the NHNE, in which the temple and light are Christ and the Lamb.
 

SaulToPaul

New member
Silver Subscriber
Hall of Fame
You can't just say that. If you have reasons, give them. That's my point. There are no reasons for it. There is nothing "missing" about the Bible or apologetics or background that "needs" things to happen in Israel. Certainly not for the 2nd coming in judgement which was originally thought to happen right after the DofJ.

There is not one clear NT passage saying so, which is why you have not posted any. No NT comment on OT "promises" either. Never. The closest you can get is the entire world of Rom 4 re Abraham, which is the world to come, the NHNE, in which the temple and light are Christ and the Lamb.

Why don't you want the earth, the city, and the heavens filled with God's children and filled with God's glory?

You know who else does not want it? Satan. You're helping him.
 

Interplanner

New member
Why don't you want the earth, the city, and the heavens filled with God's children and filled with God's glory?

You know who else does not want it? Satan. You're helping him.



lol, not at all. Currently I want "all men to be as (Paul) was except for (his) chains" and "urge all who hear me to seek righteousness, self-restraint and the kingdom of God." Acts 26.

At the end of time, Satan will be allowed to harrass all believers everywhere on earth, but then will be destroyed by the word of Christ as this world is remade in to the NHNE. That will be the earth full of the glory of God because it will be the home of righteousness, 2 Pet 3.

You are completely misinformed.
 
Top