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

[Danoh]

Sorry I go back to John 1. You can't go back to sq 1 because you won't study Greek properly. If you are not going to regularly read it and translate it, you must use Greek commentary, which is a sin to you.

What, pray, tell; is it anywhere in John 1, that is in need of having to study the Greek?

More of your over blown need to show you are all that.

As translated in my KJV, the entire chapter is as clear as to its' every passage's intended sense, as a cloudless day.

 

[steko]

Define 'according to the flesh.' The Greek expression would be 'kata sarka' as in 2 Cor 5:16, for which the NIV uses 'from a worldly point of view.'

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh [IP: which means 'according to his worldly point of view']


Rom 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh[IP: which means 'according to his worldly point of view'], hath found?

Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh[IP: which means 'according to their worldly point of view']

 

[Interplanner]

Rom 1:3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh [IP: which means 'according to his worldly point of view']


Rom 4:1 What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh[IP: which means 'according to his worldly point of view'], hath found?

Rom 9:3 For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh[IP: which means 'according to their worldly point of view']

I think 1:3 at least, belongs with the 'how then is Christ David's son?'--the last exchange in the gospels before the crucifixion starts. Because he is actually the son of God. But the lineage came that way of David.

 

[steko]

I think 1:3 at least, belongs with the 'how then is Christ David's son?'--the last exchange in the gospels before the crucifixion starts. Because he is actually the son of God. But the lineage came that way of David.

My point is that Paul uses 'kata sarka' in different ways in his letters, not always the same.

 

[Tnkrbl123!]

But what he actually means is that HIS misreading of his huge library's ENDLESS guessing of MEN INTO the passages - that his so called "reasoning" is supposedly based on - IS what the New Testament passages are talking about.

His entire approach is based on "well, we don't know for sure," and "perhaps this," that; the other.

Why?

Because his is HIS books based reasoning of the traditions of men and their EVER ENDLESS books "about" the Bible.

The fool - even his "2P2P" is based on something he read in one more of his EVER ENDLESS books "about."

One thing is certain - his self-delusion that a case is based on a string of "perhaps this...maybe that" would be laughed out of any court of law.

Not surprisingly, he takes great personal offence at having this pointed out to him.

At which point, he calls for dealing with the issues he deludes himself into thinking he is addressing - a man who absolutely refuses to cite the Scriptures his errors are supposedly reinforced by.

The guy is a joke.

Plain...and simple.

Ok, well since you seem to have a better answer to my question and seem to have all of this abundant kowledge and know more than him can you please try to give me an answer to my question. You made it clear that you believe he is wrong, but you didn't give an answer , so could you start there please?

 

[Interplanner]

:thumb:

In this post by Nihilo #48, I don't think there is a way to support 'according the flesh' for Christ's reign. It is instead 'by faith' or 'according to faith.' It will be in the flesh in the future.

Yes there are various ways the expression is used, but I don't know of one about his present reign that calls it according to flesh, and usually that would mean to Paul that it was connected to the lineage and history of Israel.

 

[Interplanner]

This is the mystical magic wand you wave over OT prophecies in order to ease your guilt about changing all of their meaning, and purpose. Satanic.

It is not a magical wand at all. It is how the bulk of the NT quotes of the OT use the OT. You instead have guilt about ignoring those quotes, and are using the OT exactly as Judaism did. You are carrying their water, picking up right where it left off when they were stopped by Christ.

 

[Interplanner]

Ok, well since you seem to have a better answer to my question and seem to have all of this abundant kowledge and know more than him can you please try to give me an answer to my question. YOu made it clear that you believe he is wrong, but you didn't give an answer , so could you start there please?

He doesn't have answers. he has envy. His only 'knowledge' is tearing down someone, not by dealing with concepts or propositions, but by his exalted seat, which everyone knows he has and is seated upon.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

It is not a magical wand at all. It is how the bulk of the NT quotes of the OT use the OT. You instead have guilt about ignoring those quotes, and are using the OT exactly as Judaism did. You are carrying their water, picking up right where it left off when they were stopped by Christ.

:chuckle:

 

[Nihilo]

"Christ/Messiah" is regnal, and I believe that His name the Lord Jesus Christ is current, and not future only. He is in absentia (sitting on a higher throne) but is still validly King/Christ/Messiah now, according to the flesh. No other monarch ever rose from the dead.

In this post by Nihilo #48, I don't think there is a way to support 'according the flesh' for Christ's reign. It is instead 'by faith' or 'according to faith.' It will be in the flesh in the future.

He is currently the king of the Jews, according to the flesh, He was crowned, and they said this, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Mt27:25KJV).

Yes there are various ways the expression is used, but I don't know of one about his present reign that calls it according to flesh, and usually that would mean to Paul that it was connected to the lineage and history of Israel.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the Bridegroom of the Church, the Body of Christ.

 

[Interplanner]

​

He is currently the king of the Jews, according to the flesh, He was crowned, and they said this, "His blood be on us, and on our children" (Mt27:25KJV).
The Lord Jesus Christ is the Bridegroom of the Church, the Body of Christ.

OK, following your use of Mt 27 then, any concept of a future Davidic restoration is completely undercut by 'according to the flesh.' I would otherwise be inclined to think a Davidic restoration was according to the flesh.

 

[Nihilo]

OK, following your use of Mt 27 then, any concept of a future Davidic restoration is completely undercut by 'according to the flesh.' I would otherwise be inclined to think a Davidic restoration was according to the flesh.

In order to be a citizen of Israel it turns out was never about lineage but about faith, and even while that's the case made by Paul, the Church was still diligent to show Israel that the Lord according to the flesh was descended from David. It didn't matter to anybody else, nobody else knew who King David was.

But regarding "according to the flesh," Paul said don't even worry about it. Israel was promised a king, and they got One. He is still their king. He died but He rose again, so His reign continues. He is in absentia, sitting upon a higher throne, taking care of more important business, obeying His Father. His Father is fixing up things for Him.

 

[Danoh]

Ok, well since you seem to have a better answer to my question and seem to have all of this abundant kowledge and know more than him can you please try to give me an answer to my question. YOu made it clear that you believe he is wrong, but you didn't give an answer , so could you start there please?

TWO-Fold Purpose of God - Ephesians 1:10; 3:15.

One aspect of which was Prophesied - "since the world began" - Acts 3:21.

And one aspect of which was "kept secret since the world began" - Rom. 16:25.

TWO-Fold Purpose of God: Prophecy, and Mystery.

One concerns that aspect of His Plan and Purpose as to the Earth via a redeemed Israel as His Kingdom of Priests/Ministers of God as to the Nations of the Earth - Ex. 19:6; Is. 61:6.

The other, His once kept secret aspect of His Plan and Purpose as to the Heavenlies in a New Creature/The Body of Christ; over the Angelic Host - 1 Cor. 6:3; Eph. 1:20-23

TWO-Fold Purpose...in Christ.

Ephesians 3:15 Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is named,

Matthew 6:10 Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done in earth, as it is in heaven.

 

[Interplanner]

In order to be a citizen of Israel it turns out was never about lineage but about faith, and even while that's the case made by Paul, the Church was still diligent to show Israel that the Lord according to the flesh was descended from David. It didn't matter to anybody else, nobody else knew who King David was.

But regarding "according to the flesh," Paul said don't even worry about it. Israel was promised a king, and they got One. He is still their king. He died but He rose again, so His reign continues. He is in absentia, sitting upon a higher throne, taking care of more important business, obeying His Father. His Father is fixing up things for Him.

Are "those things" a reign on this earth from Jerusalem? I don't think so.

 

[Nihilo]

Are "those things" a reign on this earth from Jerusalem? I don't think so.

OK.

 

[DAN P]

That was for STP...

Peter was saved by grace alone as he said many times, calling Judaism the futile way of life of his forefathers...

I was saved by the same grace. God was in Christ dealing with the debt of mankind's sins...

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Peter was saved by grace alone as he said many times,

1 Peter 1, he looked for that grace at the revelation of Jesus Christ,
the second coming.

 

[DAN P]

Hi , IP , so where does it say that Peter was SAVED by GRACE ??

In Eph 2:8 it says we are saved by GRACE BUT it speaks to the B O C and Ptere is not in the B O C , never !!
If you use Acts 15:11 , explain it , or are you going to EVADE me again ??
dan p

 

[Tnkrbl123!]

He doesn't have answers. he has envy. His only 'knowledge' is tearing down someone, not by dealing with concepts or propositions, but by his exalted seat, which everyone knows he has and is seated upon.

That's exactly why I asked that question ha. I mean it seems to me he thinks you are wrong, and wrote a short story about how he believes you are wrong but in that entire post he did not give one answer or one point or opinion. So if someone believes another is wrong they need to state what is right because if they know for a fact they are wrong then they are saying that because they know the right answer. so I'm just looking for that answer lol

 

[Interplanner]

Hi , IP , so where does it say that Peter was SAVED by GRACE ??

In Eph 2:8 it says we are saved by GRACE BUT it speaks to the B O C and Ptere is not in the B O C , never !!
If you use Acts 15:11 , explain it , or are you going to EVADE me again ??
dan p

Your BOC doctrine is totally bogus and fraudlent. You guys do anything to divide the Bible and divide Eph 4 (the 7 ones).