ECT IS THERE NOT A 1P AND A 1P ?

[Interplanner]

Hello, I see this "1P 2P" on here all the time but have no idea what this means. Can you please explain?

If you go far enough back in threads, you will see some that start with its definition as formed by Charles Ryrie, Dallas Theological Seminary, in his book DISPENSATIONALISM TODAY from the 60s. He came to the conclusion that there must be two programs running in the Bible, one for Jews and one for everyone else. He did this because of the frequent reference to the land in the OT, in Judaism. The two programs never meet, never intersect, never have the same purpose or out come. "Saved" does not mean the same thing in each.

My position is that, no matter what we find in the OT, the NT interp of the OT is the final meaning. If the sample, official sermon of Paul in Acts 13 says that 'whatever God promised to the fathers has been fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ' then I drop all the other things I find in the OT and go with that. I also notice there is no clear reference to a restored land of Israel in the NT, and that the eschatology of the NT about the end of time is very quickly transpired from one end to the other. The enemy of the believers is suddenly destroyed and the NHNE is made of the residue of this earth. Ie, there is no time for a restored state or theocracy of Israel.

Paul says the original "Jewish" blessing was the Gospel, in Gal 3:8,9. In fact, most of Gal 3 cannot be absorbed if you accept the premise of 2P2P. Gal 3 completely undoes it.

In other words, I find 2P2P to be a fraud and confusion.

 

[steko]

If the sample, official sermon of Paul in Acts 13 says that 'whatever God promised to the fathers has been fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ' then I drop all the other things I find in the OT and go with that. .

The problem is, it doesn't say that, therefore you base your whole paradigm on a false interpretation.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

The problem is, it doesn't say that, therefore you base your whole paradigm on a false interpretation.

Yep, he made it up because he wants it to be true.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

My position is that, no matter what we find in the OT, the NT interp of the OT is the final meaning.

And what do you do with the 80% of the OT that isn't mentioned in the NT?
Write it off as colorful language and a neat story?

 

[DAN P]

If you go far enough back in threads, you will see some that start with its definition as formed by Charles Ryrie, Dallas Theological Seminary, in his book DISPENSATIONALISM TODAY from the 60s. He came to the conclusion that there must be two programs running in the Bible, one for Jews and one for everyone else. He did this because of the frequent reference to the land in the OT, in Judaism. The two programs never meet, never intersect, never have the same purpose or out come. "Saved" does not mean the same thing in each.

My position is that, no matter what we find in the OT, the NT interp of the OT is the final meaning. If the sample, official sermon of Paul in Acts 13 says that 'whatever God promised to the fathers has been fulfilled in the resurrection of Christ' then I drop all the other things I find in the OT and go with that. I also notice there is no clear reference to a restored land of Israel in the NT, and that the eschatology of the NT about the end of time is very quickly transpired from one end to the other. The enemy of the believers is suddenly destroyed and the NHNE is made of the residue of this earth. Ie, there is no time for a restored state or theocracy of Israel.

Paul says the original "Jewish" blessing was the Gospel, in Gal 3:8,9. In fact, most of Gal 3 cannot be absorbed if you accept the premise of 2P2P. Gal 3 completely undoes it.

In other words, I find 2P2P to be a fraud and confusion.

Hi and here what many people FAIL to see , AND it is that the 4 GOSPELS are the OT !!

Jesus was born under the Law !!

He ministered under the Law !!

And He died under the Law of Moses , so SHAME on them !!

The Greek word for DIATHEKE can be translated by , COVENANT , TESTAMENT , WILL , AGREEMENT !!

dan p

 

[Nihilo]

It was valid so far as it demonstrated that He took the curse placed on the creation on Himself and through His victory over death He will restore the creation and there will be no more curse.

It also represents the antitype of the ram caught in the thorn bush at the interrupted sacrifice of Isaac.

I apologize. All I really understood here was "It was valid." I understand that you're qualifying it, but is it sufficient to sum up your view that Yes, the Lord's crown of thorns, was a valid crown?

 

[Danoh]

Hello, I see this "1P 2P" on here all the time but have no idea what this means. Can you please explain?

The fool who uses that is Interplanner.

If he had any sense, he'd simply use the word Dispys - just two more key strokes - and presto - no more need to explain "well 2P2P means such and so, and blah - blah - blah - blah - blah..."

But I suspect he gets off on being asked - so he can then go into o how wonderfully read up he is :chuckle:

As clueless of Dispensationalism as he has continued to prove himself being from his very first post on TOL, to his next one.

 

[Danoh]

Hi and here what many people FAIL to see , AND it is that the 4 GOSPELS are the OT !!

Jesus was born under the Law !!

He ministered under the Law !!

And He died under the Law of Moses , so SHAME on them !!

The Greek word for DIATHEKE can be translated by , COVENANT , TESTAMENT , WILL , AGREEMENT !!

dan p

Yep.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 8:1 When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him. 8:2 And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 8:3 And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

Matthew 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 23:2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

 

[DAN P]

Yep.

Matthew 5:17 Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. 5:18 For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. 5:19 Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven. 5:20 For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Matthew 8:1 When he was come down from the mountain, great multitudes followed him. 8:2 And, behold, there came a leper and worshipped him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean. 8:3 And Jesus put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will; be thou clean. And immediately his leprosy was cleansed. 8:4 And Jesus saith unto him, See thou tell no man; but go thy way, shew thyself to the priest, and offer the gift that Moses commanded, for a testimony unto them.

Matthew 23:1 Then spake Jesus to the multitude, and to his disciples, 23:2 Saying, The scribes and the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat: 23:3 All therefore whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe and do; but do not ye after their works: for they say, and do not.

Hi and we see that INTERPLANER has not responded to a 1P ans a 1P as they are so bankrupt and your Matt 5:17 just destroys him , and I know that as the 4 gospels is still all OT ground !!

dan p

 

[steko]

I apologize. All I really understood here was "It was valid." I understand that you're qualifying it, but is it sufficient to sum up your view that Yes, the Lord's crown of thorns, was a valid crown?

I really don't know how you are using the term 'valid' or why this question even came up in this thread.

Certainly, the crown of thorns is not a crown of honor, for Scripture declares that Christ will be wearing 'many crowns' at His second coming to earth. Should we assume made of gold?
I don't know but Moses was instructed to make a crown of gold for the Ark of the Covenant and there was to be a crown for Aaron.

I suppose Melchizedek wore a crown.
It doesn't speak of David's crown, that I know of.

Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

 

[Nihilo]

I really don't know how you are using the term 'valid' or why this question even came up in this thread.

Certainly, the crown of thorns is not a crown of honor, for Scripture declares that Christ will be wearing 'many crowns' at His second coming to earth. Should we assume made of gold?
I don't know but Moses was instructed to make a crown of gold for the Ark of the Covenant and there was to be a crown for Aaron.

I suppose Melchizedek wore a crown.
It doesn't speak of David's crown, that I know of.

Rev 19:12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Was His crown of thorns a legitimate, valid crown? IOW, was He crowned as king of anybody or anything, when they placed that crown of thorns upon His head? Was it a coronation? And if so, what was His kingdom? And if not, then I'd say that it was not a valid crown. If that clarifies at all?

 

[steko]

Was His crown of thorns a legitimate, valid crown? IOW, was He crowned as king of anybody or anything, when they placed that crown of thorns upon His head? Was it a coronation? And if so, what was His kingdom? And if not, then I'd say that it was not a valid crown. If that clarifies at all?

I don't believe that it was a valid crown in that sense.
I believe that the Lord Jesus will be coronated at His second coming when He takes His promised throne, the throne of David.

 

[Interplanner]

I don't believe that it was a valid crown in that sense.
I believe that the Lord Jesus will be coronated at His second coming when He takes His promised throne, the throne of David.

He is on that throne; that is why David foresaw the resurrection as the enthronement in Acts 2:30-31's interp of such OT passages, which of course, 2P2P ignores.

This is also why the string of verses is there in Acts 13:32 about David and from Isaiah, and being made a Son, etc.

And why the raised fallen tent of David is the Gentile's faith right then in that generation.

Acts 13 says this message of the resurrected Christ fulfilling everything of the promise to the fathers is a message that is for both Jews and Gentiles: v 26

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Acts 13 says this message of the resurrected Christ fulfilling everything of the promise to the fathers is a message that is for both Jews and Gentiles: v 26

Made up, satanic lie lifted from his stack of commentaries.

 

[Interplanner]

Made up, satanic lie lifted from his stack of commentaries.

It is made from the context of both this and Acts 2's sermons. Only 2P2Ps can't see it, because they are too busy trying to 'fix' the problems of the Bible, for which God has needed them since 1900.

No reference to David in Paul or Acts (which is Luke transcribing Paul, mostly) goes in the direction or shape or mission or destiny that 2P2P imagines is there.

 

[Interplanner]

As for the OP here, in case we lose all context, DanP does not seem to know that the problem I have with 2P2P IS THAT THERE IS TWO!!!! Of course, there is one people and program. Ever read Ephesians? 3? 4?

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

It is made from the context of both this and Acts 2's sermons. Only 2P2Ps can't see it, because they are too busy trying to 'fix' the problems of the Bible, for which God has needed them since 1900.

No reference to David in Paul or Acts (which is Luke transcribing Paul, mostly) goes in the direction or shape or mission or destiny that 2P2P imagines is there.

Baloney.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

too busy trying to 'fix' the problems of the Bible,

That would be you.
You will not believe and allow things to be different.

 

[Interplanner]

That would be you.
You will not believe and allow things to be different.

There aren't any. I don't end up with two gospels, three heavens, no cell phone service, 3 feasts unfilfilled, one feast fulfilled in Hebrews but not realized by you, ignorance of the structure of shadow vs reality, child-training in the 'elements of the world' vs Christ, justification as the solution to the debt of sin, etc. Those are all your problems to clear up.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

There aren't any. I don't end up with two gospels, three heavens, no cell phone service, 3 feasts unfilfilled, one feast fulfilled in Hebrews but not realized by you, ignorance of the structure of shadow vs reality, child-training in the 'elements of the world' vs Christ, justification as the solution to the debt of sin, etc. Those are all your problems to clear up.

:chuckle:

Poor IP.