ECT Do those who believe MAD have no problem disregarding what Jesus actually taught ?

[1Mind1Spirit]

Both Augustine and Calvin were ignorant of the truth that the Apostle Paul preached by the Gospel he received from the Ascended Lord Jesus Christ. They may both end up being judged by their WORKS and cast into the Lake of Fire?

Did they believe Jesus was the son of God?

If so......

Can I take it that you may not be signed sealed and delivered either?

 

[1Mind1Spirit]

Hi so where do you say the NEW COVENANT BEGAN and to whom ?

dan p

It began to be manifested with his birth.

As far as to whom....

1 Timothy 3:16
And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


There is no end.

Luke 1:33
And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Hi so where do you say the NEW COVENANT BEGAN and to whom ?

dan p

Are you taking issue with the statements I provided? Are they accurate? I am only seeking to see if these statements are accurate.

Or are you saying well, if the NC did not begin with Our Lord's birth then when does a person think it begins?

AMR

 

[heir]

Not so Heir.

They all preach Christ crucified.

:nono: They do not preach the cross as the power of God (which it is 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV, Romans 1:16 KJV).

They and MAD are all guilty of adding things fit to be burned.

You've nothing bad on MAD. You're just blowing hot air.

 

[heir]

Is that your great Hope?

Ephesians 4:4-6 KJV, Titus 2:13 KJV

 

[heir]

Did they believe Jesus was the son of God?

It wouldn't save them if they did.

 

[heir]

Can I take it that you may not be signed sealed and delivered either?

GM has a testimony of salvation as do I. We are saved and sealed (1 Corinthians 15:1-4 KJV, Ephesians 1:13-14 KJV). Are you?

 

[Crucible]

MADists see Paul as the first 'grace saint', which requires that Peter was never in Rome, no gentiles were Christian, and one apostle was sent to the masses while all the others were sent to a vestige.

They think Paul founded 'faith without works', outright contradicting James, and

they don't hold to the Replacement dogma? :AMR:

Rejection of baptism, communion, ignoring Abraham's faith alone, Ruth's adoption-

(I doubt they even speak on the Old Testament at church)




MADism is straight up blasphemy because ALL IT IS is all their grudging, gentile biases tangled up in biblical interpretation :chuckle:

 

[Tambora]

@Grosnick Marowbe


Is this an accurate view of Mid-Acts Dispensationalism ( MAD )?

1. Dispensational Theology distinguishes between Israel and the Church
2. Unaware that Jesus will be crucified, the 12 preach the gospel of the kingdom
3. Isaiah chapter 53
4. Rightly dividing the word: A scriptural necessity
5. The new covenant did NOT begin with the birth of Christ
6. Circumcision: The TOKEN of the Abrahamic Covenant
7. The children of Israel were to SEPARATE themselves from the Gentiles
8. God promised to BLESS those who blessed Abraham's "seed", the nation of Israel
9. Gentiles were excluded from Christ's earthly ministry
10. In Acts 10, Cornelius does not portray today's salvation of Uncircumcised Gentiles
11. Even in Acts 3, Israel was STILL the "seed" through whom the nations were blessed
12. The "Great Commission", being prophetic, was interrupted
13. The "dispensation of grace": Prophecy interrupted; an unprophesied mystery begins
14. Grecians, in Acts chapters 6 and 11, were Greek-speaking JEWS, not Gentiles
15. The book of James was not written to Gentiles
16. The Apostle Paul - 14 passages which state that he is the Lord's Spokesman to the Gentiles

AMR

Some are not. accurate as I see it.

Gentiles were always included, but with an exalted Israel in mind.
And one could be kicked out.
At this time Israel is fallen, and the church/congregation that we refer to as the Body of Christ began.
And one could not be kicked out.

Through Israel's rise --- prophesy.
Through Israel's fall --- mystery.

THE RISE
Isaiah 60:3 KJV
(3) And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.


THE FALL
Romans 11:11-12 KJV
(11) I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
(12) Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

 

[Interplanner]

Some are not. accurate as I see it.

Gentiles were always included, but with an exalted Israel in mind.
And one could be kicked out.
At this time Israel is fallen, and the church/congregation that we refer to as the Body of Christ began.
And one could not be kicked out.

Through Israel's rise --- prophesy.
Through Israel's fall --- mystery.

THE RISE
Isaiah 60:3 KJV
(3) And the Gentiles shall come to thy light, and kings to the brightness of thy rising.


THE FALL
Romans 11:11-12 KJV
(11) I say then, Have they stumbled that they should fall? God forbid: but rather through their fall salvation is come unto the Gentiles, for to provoke them to jealousy.
(12) Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their fulness?

sorry folks, but God does not do anything with 100% of any ethne any more. He deals with people who have faith one way, and those who disbelieve another. rom 11:30. Everything has changed.

 

[Tambora]

sorry folks, but God does not do anything with 100% of any ethne any more.

At this time, that's right.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

MADists see Paul as the first 'grace saint', which requires that Peter was never in Rome, no gentiles were Christian, and one apostle was sent to the masses while all the others were sent to a vestige.

They think Paul founded 'faith without works', outright contradicting James, and

they don't hold to the Replacement dogma? :AMR:

Rejection of baptism, communion, ignoring Abraham's faith alone, Ruth's adoption-

(I doubt they even speak on the Old Testament at church)




MADism is straight up blasphemy because ALL IT IS is all their grudging, gentile biases tangled up in biblical interpretation :chuckle:

:chuckle:

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Is that your great Hope?

:chuckle:

 

[Lighthouse]

Here's a few....


Luke 23:28
But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for your children.

Matthew 22:7
But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.


Mark 9:1
And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, That there be some of them that stand here, which shall not taste of death, till they have seen the kingdom of God come with power.

Because God's not allowed to change His mind.

This is about salvation. MAD does not make any distinction with regard to how people are saved.

All people are only ever saved by grace through Jesus Christ, no matter when they lived.

MAD makes a distinction in that the message preached to bring people to salvation has changed.

They don't actually care, G.

Not so Heir.

They all preach Christ crucified.

They and MAD are all guilty of adding things fit to be burned.

:doh:

That is not the be all end all of the gospel. So them preaching it doesn't mean they preach the dispensation of the grace of God.

Now, what has MAD added?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

MADists see Paul as the first 'grace saint', which requires that Peter was never in Rome, no gentiles were Christian, and one apostle was sent to the masses while all the others were sent to a vestige.

They think Paul founded 'faith without works', outright contradicting James, and

they don't hold to the Replacement dogma? :AMR:

Rejection of baptism, communion, ignoring Abraham's faith alone, Ruth's adoption-

(I doubt they even speak on the Old Testament at church)




MADism is straight up blasphemy because ALL IT IS is all their grudging, gentile biases tangled up in biblical interpretation :chuckle:

:chuckle:

 

[Interplanner]

Lighthouse wrote:

Because God's not allowed to change His mind.


But he is allowed to say what the OT was about. You have missed the whole point of NT quotation of the OT.

Christ was the Promised Seed, and Judaism said no, and that the Law replaced the Promise, Gal 3:17. Otherwise Paul would have had smooth sailing dealing with Judaism. And there would be 10 crystal clear places in the NT where Paul would calm every one down and say, 'Brothers, you're forgetting that God is going to reinstate Judaism in Judea and that institution will rule the world, etc.' No, there is nada, zip, zero of that.

Torah is the 2nd part of the trinity of Judaism, and you are doing the same thing that Jn 7 speaks of: 'You (Judaism's leaders) search the OT because you think that in it you have 'life'; it is these that testify of Me!'

 

[Crucible]

~They chuckle at their own inconsistency~

I guess that's what a MAdist is like when they are made to go from offense to defense :idunno:

It's refreshing to see people who denounce everyone else all the time get a taste of their own medicine.

 

[dodge]

:nono: They do not preach the cross as the power of God (which it is 1 Corinthians 1:18 KJV, Romans 1:16 KJV).

You've nothing bad on MAD. You're just blowing hot air.

Christians that glory glory in the LORD not in Paul.

Jer 9:24
But let him that glorieth glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me, that I am the LORD which exercise lovingkindness, judgment, and righteousness, in the earth: for in these things I delight, saith the LORD.

1Co 1:31
That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.

2Co 10:17
But he that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord

 

[dodge]

No, you're wrong. See how that works?


Yes, one of the promises given to THE TWO HOUSES OF ISRAEL was just that.


No, YOU don't know what it means.

You're premise does NOT lead to your conclusion. You are ASSUMING it.

God can forgive my sins in Christ WITHOUT a covenant and that is JUST what He did.

If one is not part of the new covenant he/she has no part in Christ.


Heb 9:20
Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

 

[Interplanner]

If one is not part of the new covenant he/she has no part in Christ.


Heb 9:20
Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

More to the point: "This is the new covenant in my blood, which is poured out for you." But you know those theologians; they like to deny the obvious.