2P2P's fundamental mistake at Acts 2

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul looked back to the cross to see his sins blotted out.

Different programs, different peoples, different churches, different purposes, different inheritances.

Keep mixing them, and you will continue in your mass confusion.



This was written by STP a few days ago, and so if anyone is in denial about the existence of 2P2P or its antithesis to the NT, there it is.

It sounds to me like it is not even the cross of Christ that blots out some people's sins, but rather their practice of Judaism.

Funny how both people mentioned are Jews! (Let's just pick which way we want sins blotted out, huh?)

And then there's the obtuse errors of peoples, churches, purposes, inheritances, all in defiance of...everything Ephesians says!
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul looked back to the cross to see his sins blotted out.

Different programs, different peoples, different churches, different purposes, different inheritances.

Keep mixing them, and you will continue in your mass confusion.



This was written by STP a few days ago,
Click to expand...

Acts 3

vs

Romans 5-6



Just believe the words on the page.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
Acts 3

vs

Romans 5-6



Just believe the words on the page.
Click to expand...




I do! Peter is clearly making a bona fide offer to those people right then, if they would join in the Christian mission through the Spirit of God. There is nothing about waiting for the future. That is why I have said what I did about the Sending. It can't be future; it is contrasted with him being in heaven until the close of the kingdom.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
I do! Peter is clearly making a bona fide offer to those people right then, if they would join in the Christian mission through the Spirit of God. There is nothing about waiting for the future. That is why I have said what I did about the Sending.
Click to expand...

Unlike you, Peter knew that the day of Atonement and the blotting out of their sins was when the LORD returned.
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul loo


Hi and JUST where is verse that backs you up , that Peter was /or was , LOOKING for the 2 nd coming to be saved ??

So you can not prove that Peter was saved DURING Jesus earthy ministry ??

There is a verse that shows how Peter was saved , so ask and I will tell YOU !!

You can NOT explain how you are saved under a 1P,or IP so-called gospel , CAN YOU ??

Study Luke 22 , and you will LEARN otherwise !!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
D

Danoh

New member
DAN P said:
Interplanner said:
Peter looked to the 2nd coming to have his sins blotted out.
Paul loo

_______________
DanP answered:

Hi and JUST where is verse that backs you up , that Peter was /or was , LOOKING for the 2 nd coming to be saved ??

So you can not prove that Peter was saved DURING Jesus earthy ministry ??

There is a verse that shows how Peter was saved , so ask and I will tell YOU !!

You can NOT explain how you are saved under a 1P,or IP so-called gospel , CAN YOU ??

Study Luke 22 , and you will LEARN otherwise !!
Click to expand...


Dan, it is STP and a few others on here who hold to the error that Peter had to wait for the 2nd Coming for his sins to be blotted out, and or be saved.

IP was merely repeating that that is what THEY hold about that - he was not agreeing with them about it.
Click to expand...
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
Danoh said:
DAN P said:
Dan, it is STP and a few others on here who hold to the error that Peter had to wait for the 2nd Coming for his sins to be blotted out, and or be saved.

IP was merely repeating that that is what THEY hold about that - he was not agreeing with them about it.
Click to expand...


Hi and I have not seen that written by anyone !!

I beleve that Luke 22 explains that Peter was converted !!

So , Jesus prayer that Peter faith will not FAIL ? did not happen ??

My proof is more than , just Luke 22 , for we know that Peter was not saved by GRACE as 1 Cor 15:8 and Acts 15:11 explains OR how will anyone explain away the system of animal SACRIFICES ??

Explain Heb 9:15 ??

dan p
Click to expand...
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
DAN P said:
Hi and I have not seen that written by anyone !!
Click to expand...

I do believe, as in 1 Peter and Act 3, that Peter looked forward to having his sins blotted out and being "saved" at the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Obviously, he was already a believer, already "converted", etc.
 
D

Danoh

New member
DAN P said:
Danoh said:
Hi and I have not seen that written by anyone !!

I beleve that Luke 22 explains that Peter was converted !!

So , Jesus prayer that Peter faith will not FAIL ? did not happen ??

My proof is more than , just Luke 22 , for we know that Peter was not saved by GRACE as 1 Cor 15:8 and Acts 15:11 explains OR how will anyone explain away the system of animal SACRIFICES ??

Explain Heb 9:15 ??

dan p
Click to expand...

Actually, he was saved under the Grace described, say, in John 1 - Israel's PROPHESIED Grace.

As for your other point; there is an aspect of the sacrifice system under the Law having to do with outward cleansing before an Israelite can approach doing service unto God, as in Zechariah's descriptions.

Likewise with the various objects, tables, and so on - they first have to be cleansed with blood and so on before being used in service to God.

The Millennial system, bro.

"Out of Zion shall go forth the Law."
Click to expand...
 
D

DAN P

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
I do believe, as in 1 Peter and Act 3, that Peter looked forward to having his sins blotted out and being "saved" at the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Obviously, he was already a believer, already "converted", etc.
Click to expand...



Hi and all that sinned under the Law of MOSES and any keeping THEIR animal sacrifices , were forgiven by Heb 9:15 ,and 26 as it says , that Christ paid for the sins under the Old Covenant " He appeared to put away SIN by the sacrifice of Himself !!

So , then how was Peter " converted " ??

#1, Jesus PRAYED for Peter !!

#2 , Prayed that Peter's that his FAITH FAIL NOT , VERSE 32 !!

#3 The verb ART CONVERTED / EPISTREPHO , is in the PAST TENSE or AORIST TENSE and then means to me that Peter was converted , during Jesus earthly ministry and the ACTIVE VOICE means that Jesus's prayer was answered concerning Peter !!

#3 Converted means to Turn , worship the true God , Obey God !!

When did that happen ??

Just read the rest of Luke 22 and we know that God only lost one apostle , and that was JUDAS !!

It is obvious that NO ONE is saved like Peter as Paul is the Pattern of our salvation and 1 Cor 12:3 and Acts 16:4 explains Rom 10:9 as with the HEART we believe !!

dan p
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Yesterday, I tried to describe how justification is different from personal transformation. I could improve on one thing: I didn't use the term 'imputed' just several synonyms.

You know what imputed righteousness means, right?
 
D

Danoh

New member
SaulToPaul said:
I do believe, as in 1 Peter and Act 3, that Peter looked forward to having his sins blotted out and being "saved" at the Revelation of Jesus Christ. Obviously, he was already a believer, already "converted", etc.
Click to expand...

That is because you are off in your sense of how the EARLY Modern English of the KJV uses said English.

As in your sense of Acts 15's "shall be saved" - which is Peter's reminding his own of an established principle - he was not referring to a time frame.

The issue was whether or not those Gentiles were saved and on what basis - the issue was not about some future time frame.

What has thrown you off is your reading of EVERY Day INFORMAL Modern North American sense of wording into what is actually an EARLY Modern English - EARLY Modern BRITTISH English, at that.

You're wrong. Plain and simple.

Barney's concluding that "compelsion" is actually correct, just because he has concluded it is.

And I am merely pointing these things out; nothing more.

You are wrong on this.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

There also "shall be" is used when describing a standard.

It is not referring to a time frame.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Danoh said:
That is because you are off in your sense of how the EARLY Modern English of the KJV uses said English.

As in your sense of Acts 15's "shall be saved" - which is Peter's reminding his own of an established principle - he was not referring to a time frame.

The issue was whether or not those Gentiles were saved and on what basis - the issue was not about some future time frame.

What has thrown you off is your reading of EVERY Day INFORMAL Modern North American sense of wording into what is actually an EARLY Modern English - EARLY Modern BRITTISH English, at that.

You're wrong. Plain and simple.

Barney's concluding that "compelsion" is actually correct, just because he has concluded it is.

And I am merely pointing these things out; nothing more.

You are wrong on this.

Genesis 1:29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.

There also "shall be" is used when describing a standard.

It is not referring to a time frame.
Click to expand...

:chuckle:
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
DAN P said:
Hi and all that sinned under the Law of MOSES and any keeping THEIR animal sacrifices , were forgiven by Heb 9:15 ,and 26 as it says , that Christ paid for the sins under the Old Covenant " He appeared to put away SIN by the sacrifice of Himself !!

So , then how was Peter " converted " ??

#1, Jesus PRAYED for Peter !!

#2 , Prayed that Peter's that his FAITH FAIL NOT , VERSE 32 !!

#3 The verb ART CONVERTED / EPISTREPHO , is in the PAST TENSE or AORIST TENSE and then means to me that Peter was converted , during Jesus earthly ministry and the ACTIVE VOICE means that Jesus's prayer was answered concerning Peter !!

#3 Converted means to Turn , worship the true God , Obey God !!

When did that happen ??

Just read the rest of Luke 22 and we know that God only lost one apostle , and that was JUDAS !!

It is obvious that NO ONE is saved like Peter as Paul is the Pattern of our salvation and 1 Cor 12:3 and Acts 16:4 explains Rom 10:9 as with the HEART we believe !!

dan p
Click to expand...

Dan P,

When did the LORD fulfill the feast of the Day of Atonement?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top