ECT Two Gospels Preached During The Acts Period

Interplanner

New member
Your bizarre "interp" requires that EVERY passage reiterate ALL details? I guess that you want a Bible that takes a semi truck to haul around.


The problem of course is that none of the NT passages about it in normal language have any Judaic detail. Including the fact that 'saved' in Rom 11 is not about a theocracy in Judea. 'Saved' always means justification from sins in Romans or side-effects of justification.
 

Right Divider

Body part
The problem of course is that none of the NT passages about it in normal language have any Judaic detail. Including the fact that 'saved' in Rom 11 is not about a theocracy in Judea. 'Saved' always means justification from sins in Romans or side-effects of justification.
Yes, it does: http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ave-To-David&p=4889481&viewfull=1#post4889481

No, the word "saved" means whatever it means in the CONTEXT in which it is used. Just like ALL of the English language which you, apparently, do not understand.

Luke 1:67-75 (AKJV/PCE)
(1:67) And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, (1:68) Blessed [be] the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, (1:69) And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (1:70) As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: (1:71) That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; (1:72) To perform the mercy [promised] to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; (1:73) The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, (1:74) That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, (1:75) In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life.

THAT "saved" in verse 71 is talking about being delivered from their enemies, just like it confirms in verse 74.
 
Last edited:

Interplanner

New member
Yes, it does: http://theologyonline.com/showthrea...ave-To-David&p=4889481&viewfull=1#post4889481

No, the word "saved" means whatever it means in the CONTEXT in which it is used. Just like ALL of the English language which you, apparently, do not understand.

Luke 1:67-75 (AKJV/PCE)
(1:67) And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying, (1:68) Blessed [be] the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, (1:69) And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; (1:70) As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: (1:71) That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us; (1:72) To perform the mercy [promised] to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant; (1:73) The oath which he sware to our father Abraham, (1:74) That he would grant unto us, that we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies might serve him without fear, (1:75) In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of our life.

THAT "saved" in verse 71 is talking about being delivered from their enemies, just like it confirms in verse 74.


I know that about context which is why I said it. Paul said it was justification. He says nothing about a Davidic theocracy. He said it was what the New covenant would bring, which is the righteousness of God. He said sins would be taken away, the same expression the Baptiser used, and he said it would turn them from sin, and the sin was asserting their own justification.

You have no answers and I'm not sure you know the questions.

That's why you go to somewhere in Luke in a poem or song instead of the immediate passages mentioned because you can't stand specfics.
 

Right Divider

Body part
I know that about context which is why I said it. Paul said it was justification.
You are just a one trick pony that does NOT listen to ANYTHING that anyone but YOURSELF says.

Quit trying to change the subject. In Luke 1:71-74 "saved" has NOTHING to do with justification, not like YOU say that saved ALWAYS means justification.

Just proves that you have no understanding of even simple things, let alone anything beyond that.

He says nothing about a Davidic theocracy. He said it was what the New covenant would bring, which is the righteousness of God. He said sins would be taken away, the same expression the Baptiser used, and he said it would turn them from sin, and the sin was asserting their own justification.
Where is the throne of His father David?

Was that angel of the Lord incorrect?

No, it is YOU that is incorrect.

Is this another one of your Cancelationist "interp"?

You have no answers and I'm not sure you know the questions.

That's why you go to somewhere in Luke in a poem or song instead of the immediate passages mentioned because you can't stand specfics.
DingleBerry, you think that this PROPHECY reported by an angel of the Lord was "in a poem or song".

You are as dumb as a box of rocks. Quit embarrassing yourself and leave this site permanently.
 
Last edited:

Interplanner

New member
You are just a one trick pony that does NOT listen to ANYTHING that anyone bur YOURSELF says.

Quit trying to change the subject. In Luke 1:71-74 "saved" has NOTHING to do with justification, not like YOU say that saved ALWAYS means justification.

Just proves that you have no understanding of even simple things, let alone anything beyond that.


Where is the throne of His father David?

Was that angel of the Lord incorrect?

No, it is YOU that is incorrect.

Is this another one of your Cancelationist "interp"?


DingleBerry, you think that this PROPHECY reported by an angel of the Lord was "in a poem or song".

You are as dumb as a box of rocks. Quit embarrassing yourself and leave this site permanently.



You changed locations from ROm 11 to Luke, but the point about Luke was that it is a song, not a doctrinal passage like Gal 3. But you are also too tight about David. As soon as I mention that, it is as if you never heard Christ disconnect Judaism from David in his last debate: 'how then is he is son?' THE CONNECTION DOES NOT MATTER ANY MORE!

It does not matter if we 'find' a location for David's throne, because it is the fact of Christ reigning now by and through our proclamation that he is Lord. There is no cancelation; Is 9 said the kingdom always would be on 'his shoulders.' Some say that is the cross; I'm not sure.

Sorry you are feeling so embarrassed but it as if you are seeing the NT for the first time.
 

Right Divider

Body part
You changed locations from ROm 11 to Luke, but the point about Luke was that it is a song, not a doctrinal passage like Gal 3.
  • I was responding to YOUR bogus argument about lack of earthly kingdom information in what you call the NT
  • How is this a song?
    Luke 1:26-39 (AKJV/PCE)
    (1:26) And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth, (1:27) To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph, of the house of David; and the virgin's name [was] Mary. (1:28) And the angel came in unto her, and said, Hail, [thou that art] highly favoured, the Lord [is] with thee: blessed [art] thou among women. (1:29) And when she saw [him], she was troubled at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be. (1:30) And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hast found favour with God. (1:31) And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. (1:32) He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: (1:33) And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. (1:34) Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing I know not a man? (1:35) And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God. (1:36) And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also conceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with her, who was called barren. (1:37) For with God nothing shall be impossible. (1:38) And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed from her. (1:39) And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country with haste, into a city of Juda;
  • How is this PROPHECY were the angel Gabriel is conversing with Mary a SONG?
  • You idea of what are "doctrinal passages" is as bad overall perverted "interp".
  • What is "the throne of His father David"?
  • What is "the house of Jacob"?
  • Why are you so dumb?
 

Interplanner

New member
You're right about the song; I was referring to either of the two.

You have a preset meaning for the throne of David. It is the same as Judaism's at the time. Christ superceded that. such as in the opening of John: 'tear down this temple and I will rebuild it in 3 days.' It is all through John and the NT, once your eyes are open to IN CHRIST.

Eph 1-3 is mostly doctrinal passage. Not a song or two like Lk 1-2, in which the rest is narrative anyway.

If you want dumb questions try this one: why don't you answer why Christ's 'how can (Christ) be his son?' changed the view of Judaism forever?

Or, 'he will reign on his throne forever' yet the earth is consumed in fire at the end of time.
 

Interplanner

New member
The reason the 'consolation' and 'redemption' of Israel are in Lk 2 is to show that the kind of 'deliverance' Jesus was going give Israel was not going to be through battle with Rome like the zealot revolt was fomenting. That it was meant in another sense.

Luke-Acts was prepared for the purpose of defending Paul from such accusations; the representative defending him was Theophilus--apparently an "attorney." Lk.1:3, Acts 1:1.
 

Right Divider

Body part
You're right about the song; I was referring to either of the two.
No idea what you're talking about.

You have a preset meaning for the throne of David.
No, I let the Bible define it. You have a mythological meaning for it which is made up.

It is the same as Judaism's at the time. Christ superceded that. such as in the opening of John: 'tear down this temple and I will rebuild it in 3 days.' It is all through John and the NT, once your eyes are open to IN CHRIST.
Bogus man-made nonsense.

Eph 1-3 is mostly doctrinal passage. Not a song or two like Lk 1-2, in which the rest is narrative anyway.
Once again, where do you get this "song" nonsense? Narrative?

This is the angel Gabriel giving INFORMATION to Mary about the FUTURE with reference to the past.

If you want dumb questions try this one: why don't you answer why Christ's 'how can (Christ) be his son?' changed the view of Judaism forever?

Or, 'he will reign on his throne forever' yet the earth is consumed in fire at the end of time.
WOW, and THIS coming from a guy that can't stop telling us about the NEW HEAVEN and the NEW EARTH!

What a complete mess your are.
 

Interplanner

New member
There were two songs in Lk 1 and both say something about the throne of David. try to pay attention.

The throne of David never means a Davidic theocracy on earth in the NT. It is Christ's resurrection; that was his enthronement. Ps 2, 16, 110 are quoted to death by the apostles to prove that. That's what Christ was talking about. That's where the power comes to drive the mission of the one gospel in Acts.

So what exactly does 'I will build this temple in 3 days' mean? Mr Honcho?


The forever mess is a Davidic theocracy on this earth thta will be melted down in fire. The forever solution is Christ's reign now already that continues in the form of the NHNE, and I'm not sure that is 'physical' because God is the temple and Christ is the light, replacing the Jerusalem temple and even our solar sun. No mess at all. 2P2P is a fraud and is the mess you are struggling with.
 

Jerry Shugart

New member
The throne of David never means a Davidic theocracy on earth in the NT.

Let us look at the Lord's promises made to David in regard to that throne and kingdom:

"I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever...And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever"
(2 Sam.7:12-13).​

We can know that this throne of David is an earthly throne because Solomon sat upon that throne on the earth:

"Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly" (1 Ki. 2:12).​

We also know that the Lord will not "alter" the promises which He made to David:

"I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant...Nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David" (Ps.89:3,33-35)​

Since the Lord will not "alter" the promises which He made to David we can know that this passage from the NT is referring to the Lord Jesus'eartly throne:

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end" (Lk.1:32,33).​

The following prophecy foretells of the time when the lord Jesus will reign from His earthly throne:

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth"
(Jer.23:5).​

Since you have no place in your eschatology for these things happening you must somehow pervert what all of these verses say!
 

Interplanner

New member
Let us look at the Lord's promises made to David in regard to that throne and kingdom:

"I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne of his kingdom for ever...And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever"
(2 Sam.7:12-13).​

We can know that this throne of David is an earthly throne because Solomon sat upon that throne on the earth:

"Then sat Solomon upon the throne of David his father; and his kingdom was established greatly" (1 Ki. 2:12).​

We also know that the Lord will not "alter" the promises which He made to David:

"I have made a covenant with my chosen, I have sworn unto David my servant...Nevertheless my loving-kindness will I not utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn by my holiness that I will not lie unto David" (Ps.89:3,33-35)​

Since the Lord will not "alter" the promises which He made to David we can know that this passage from the NT is referring to the Lord Jesus'eartly throne:

"He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end" (Lk.1:32,33).​

The following prophecy foretells of the time when the lord Jesus will reign from His earthly throne:

"Behold, the days come, saith the LORD, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and a King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute judgment and justice in the earth"
(Jer.23:5).​

Since you have no place in your eschatology for these things happening you must somehow pervert what all of these verses say!


All of it is true IN CHRIST Jerry, already. That's what the res was about. That's why he stopped the leaders of Judaism with 'how can Christ be David's son?' That's why 'power' was given instead of a 'kingdom of Israel' in acts 1. The resurrection was the ascension and enthronement of Christ that Ps 2, 16, and 110 were talking about.

You think like Judaism that those prophets' lines are going to happen in our history, but they are not. they were pointing to Christ. The letter to Hebrews tells us why they are not; there is no place anymore for a reinstatement of Judaism--a Davidic theocracy! Ps 110 tells us that there was already another priesthood that Christ would installed in, not one on earth.
 
Top