ECT Is there a TRANSDITION BETWEEN ISRAEL and THE GENTILES ??

genuineoriginal

genuineoriginal

New member
Danoh said:
I doubt we'd have a same understanding of the actual sense of Romans 2.

For without the actual sense of Rom. 1:18-3:20; all sorts of misunderstandings arise as to what the Apostle Paul is actually talking about as to who, when, were, why, and how.
Click to expand...

Romans 2:11-15
11 For there is no respect of persons with God.
12 For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;
13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
14 For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:
15 Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another; )​


The law we establish is the same law that the Gentiles show when they do by nature the things contained in the law.

I am not under the law because I have the law written in the Bible to refer to "for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16).
I am not under the law because I have the law put in my heart and written in my mind (Hebrews 10:16).
I am not under the law because I am a doer of the word and not just a hearer (James 1:22).

This law, the law of the spirit (Romans 8:2), contains all the righteousness of the law written in the Torah, but is from the New Covenant and not the Old Covenant.

Jeremiah 31:31-34
31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:
32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:
33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.
34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.​


Did God put His law in your inward parts and write it in your heart?
Or do you claim you are lawless because you are under Grace?
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
Yes, the question about what the Law is now has to be screened through Rom 2 where the nations do the law by nature. That's the ongoing law that matters.

So far as I know they weren't setting up Judaistic temples, keeping sabbaths, circumcision, etc, because none of that is by nature (assuredly he means the virtuous end of the spectrum...)
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
Yes, the question about what the Law is now has to be screened through Rom 2 where the nations do the law by nature. That's the ongoing law that matters.

So far as I know they weren't setting up Judaistic temples, keeping sabbaths, circumcision, etc, because none of that is by nature (assuredly he means the virtuous end of the spectrum...)
Click to expand...

You have got to be kidding - THAT'S your understanding of Romans 2?
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
It is a perfectly logical deduction about what Paul meant by the law. Sorry it doesn't 'fit' MAD theories. Why should it? MAD is mad.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
It is a perfectly logical deduction about what Paul meant by the law. Sorry it doesn't 'fit' MAD theories. Why should it? MAD is mad.
Click to expand...

My point had nothing to do with MAD, anymore than my holding a Trinitarian view is the result of a MAD perspective on my part.

Fact is that what YOU are referring to as a logical deduction is logical within YOUR vacuum.

Fact is, Romans 1 thru 3 interprets itself via its own spiritual with spiritual comparison.

Fact is that whenever, as well as where ever, any of us might all agree on any passage or passage regardless of perspective, that is why - where and when we have each allowed the passages to interpret their sister passages and visa-versa.

In this, even you and I will agree on some things that we both find we do not agree with other MADs; Preterists; etc., on.

But you are forever stuck in "one size fits all" categorizing.

As a result, you haven't a hope of understanding where I am coming from unless I spoon feed it unto you.
 
ClimateSanity

ClimateSanity

New member
Danoh said:
My point had nothing to do with MAD, anymore than my holding a Trinitarian view is the result of a MAD perspective on my part.

Fact is that what YOU are referring to as a logical deduction is logical within YOUR vacuum.

Fact is, Romans 1 thru 3 interprets itself via its own spiritual with spiritual comparison.

Fact is that whenever, as well as where ever, any of us might all agree on any passage or passage regardless of perspective, that is why - where and when we have each allowed the passages to interpret their sister passages and visa-versa.

In this, even you and I will agree on some things that we both find we do not agree with other MADs; Preterists; etc., on.

But you are forever stuck in "one size fits all" categorizing.

As a result, you haven't a hope of understanding where I am coming from unless I spoon feed it unto you.
Click to expand...

Was Darby the one who invented " One size DOES NOT fit all"? Surely people through the ages realized all things were not the same.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
DAN P said:
genuineoriginal said:
Yes, there is, but there are two ways to calculate it.

The first recorded event in the Bible after the end of the 490 years is Peter being sent to Cornelius and Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost (Acts 10:41).

Some people would count Cornelius receiving the Holy Ghost as the beginning of the time of the Gentiles.
/QUOTE]


Hi , and there is not ONE verse to prove that Cornelius was part of the Body of Christ , period !

Cornelius HAD to be inducted into Israel !

At Cornelius time the Body of Christ was not KNOWN !!

Why do all FAIL to see that for Cornelius WATER BAPTISM was required and the speaking in Lamguages as recounted in Acts 10:45 !!

The BEGINNING and separation between Israel and GENTILES began in Acts 9:6 com[pleted in Acts Acts 28:28 !!

dan p
Click to expand...



This is what happens when we don't use the NT's own self-organizing passages to determine what the big picture is. SEPARATION instead of the living, growing unity of Eph 2-3, Rom 3, Col 1-2, 2 cor 3-5, etc
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top