ECT Request for Clarity about Judaism and D'ism
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
- Status
Interplanner
Well-known member
Honestly, I would never have known, so you all as a group need to work on your understanding. I believe that many times you said that what Jewish Christians recieve and what non-Jewish Christians recieve are two different things; that there are separate passages that apply to each; that Paul never used the temple analogy; that Peter never said believers were a kingdom of priests because that would cross the metaphor line.
D'ists never allow a creative use of an OT passage. It has to be literal. Literal means, like Nic, that if you said a person must be born again, they have to go back in to the womb and come back out, end of discussion.
Interplanner
Well-known member
As far as I can tell from them, the discples were on the right track in Acts 1. That's why (to them) Acts 1 is not a rebuke. The group has been furious with me about that.
I think you are a bit late to the drama and need to get up to speed.
As far as I can tell, Jesus was going to provide a kingdom state but it got nipped because of some fault on Israel's part. The cross was an utter surprise. They don't think the disciples went into denial about what they knew would happen in the post-confession scenes; they think the disciples never knew a thing about the death of Christ. But you can't be in denial of what you don't think can happen. The group believe the cross and the Christian believers are a total mystery. This is in footers of some of them.
So you really need to get caught up on your reading.
So you can't show where they claim there are 2 churches today.
Interplanner
Well-known member
They call it the BOC as though that was a TMd term like Great Tribulation. However, all the attention is on the differences between the two groups and how this section does not apply to that type of people. All clearly against the spirit of Paul in Gal 3 or Eph 4. STP has his three locations, but is too busy writing 'made up' to respond to everything to actually write a page on what he believes.
They also may not mean today; it's hard to tell. Sometimes they mean: well that item is true in the Great Triublation , or it was true in Acts 2 but it stopped or nonsense like that.
they say Paul did not use temple imagery about Gentiles; obviously that means 2 groups. How could it be other wise? they insist Peter did not mean non-Jews were 'a kingdom of priests'; that also obviously means two groups. In Hebrews, they have a knack for being way off topic and find ways to make it show what Jewish Christians have (which means you are seeking distinctions, and differences). They also don't think the new covenant is functioning now because to them it is the resotration of land and so it doesnt' have to do with Gentiles. So yeah, they are based on two groups.
I've never said anything different about them. It's 2P2P, a doctrine of ryries that is a train wreck to me. 2 peoples, 2 programs that don't meet or share.
This much is clear: they are far more interested in a division now than a unity then (in some future). they would much rather find a reason for Eph 2-3 not to be true now than show us something unified in the NHNE.
Which raises the confounding question of a Judaistic episode before the 2nd coming. I don't find it anywhere in the NT. 2 Pet 3 being the best, longest, non-symbolic treatment of what will happen. this world ends in sin and is judged; the NHNE is made and is not (from Rev) the same kind of physical reality anyway. But there is no episode of doing things in Judea and Christ just with Jews while Gentiles are in Hotel Heaven looking down and wishing they could be there and fantasy questions like that.
go back and read skeptically.
Just for you, IP - "...two or three witnesses" on what is meant by the phrase "The B.O.C."
Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
1 Corinthians 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Rom. 5:8
Romans 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.
1 Corinthians 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular.
Ephesians 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Rom. 5:8
A simple but very useful Study PRINCIPLE...
Acts 15:6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.
Matthew 10:23 But when they persecute you in this city, flee ye into another: for verily I say unto you, Ye shall not have gone over the cities of Israel, till the Son of man be come.
Now guess where Joppa (modern day Jaffa) was, back then?
Joshua 19:40 And the seventh lot came out for the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families. 19:41 And the coast of their inheritance was Zorah, and Eshtaol, and Irshemesh, 19:42 And Shaalabbin, and Ajalon, and Jethlah, 19:43 And Elon, and Thimnathah, and Ekron, 19:44 And Eltekeh, and Gibbethon, and Baalath, 19:46 And Mejarkon, and Rakkon, with the border before Japho. 19:47 And the coast of the children of Dan went out too little for them: therefore the children of Dan went up to fight against Leshem, and took it, and smote it with the edge of the sword, and possessed it, and dwelt therein, and called Leshem, Dan, after the name of Dan their father. 19:48 This is the inheritance of the tribe of the children of Dan according to their families, these cities with their villages.
About thirty miles northwest of Jerusalem, on the southwest coast of Israel.
Try a wider frame of reference next time (the simple question 'what ELSE have I NOT considered, or looked at a bit more in depth BEFORE allowing myself my conclusion?')
Great Study PRINCIPLE, that.
Acts 17:11,12.
Now were are getting some where. The reason you can't go hit the quote button is because nobody is saying it, they are saying the opposite.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Maybe you have a point on that one item, but I have way too many objections. I wrote the threads:
10 principles of NT eschatology
notes on D'ism this week
8 things that sink D'ism (9)
I'm not missing what you guys are saying. It's 2P2P, and that, to use an expression from Clete, is the farce here.
I hardly ever write a followup that does not include their quote; there is no point in needling me about that.
In fact, what they do often is what you did: claim victory without details. I suspect that is because d'ism is one complicated or qualified explanation after another.
Last edited:
And there is this one.
"And He is the head of the body, the church" (Colossians 1:18)
And the church is his kingdom known as the kingdom of God, which is what Jesus preached.
"He has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love, in whom we have redemption through His blood, the forgiveness of sins." (Colossians 1:13-14)
Interplanner
Well-known member
Thx, so why does so much time go into saying that there are whole passages/letters that aren't for Gentiles if it is all one and grounded in the apostle's teaching (see my thread 'the core NT theology')? What I see is a few application only for jewish Christians in Hebrews, for ex., and just for that generation. Most of it is for everyone, and the thing is written in the NT's most complicated Greek! The "one new man" of Eph 2 was the ultimate goal, and succeeded. The whole gradually learned how to be trans-cultural, where cultural items are not lifted up to divide.
No, it is the point of your whole thread.
It was pointed out to you right away, right here.
You are just here to disrupt, like BLM, Antifa, muslims, and nazis.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Which was the one item that I thought may have a point? You might have included it in the quote...
Interplanner
Well-known member
STP's formula is hilarious. Anyway, after the laugh, it is nowhere in the NT, which may be why D'ists like it. they aren't really grounded.
the main problem is the complete distortion of the meaning of the new covenant, which has been shown many times that the D'ist club avoids the gospels, and Heb 9-10, and both Corinthian passages: because they are clearly for all believers, and they are about being justified from our sins. It would simply be too painful for D'ists to realize that Acts 13's sermon really is spot on and anchors so much in so many other places in Paul.
Mr. Make Up will now doubt be wearing salmon tones today in his make up.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Now compare this nick with the one just above about old, new and boc believers. Parallel separate outcomes. It is utter fantasy. I know of no place it is taught in the Christian world until running into Mr. Make Up. Blush today?
Interplanner
Well-known member
My point was that just when you think they are talking about today, they say them meant in the future, whether millenially or NHNE, which they fail to sort. This is when they talk about interruption, mystery, things on hold, on suspension, etc. So that all their program pieces take place at the right time.
That's why they are so bothered by what I show about the mystery. 1, that it was not the incoming of Gentiles that was mystery. That it was not even that exclusive, starting with Jews first. and 2, that it was something Judaism in Paul's time was not seeing, ie, was veiled. That totally ticks them off, because they think they are organizing when a land restoration promise is supposed to happen. That ticks them off so that they refuse to see Acts 1 as the last rebuke about asking about that kind of kingdom, never to be mentioned again.
Interplanner
Well-known member
I don't "get nowhere;" I have the powerful work of Christ in that generation reaching a huge part of the world. It has the resound of the NT passages. The ecclesia demonstrates to principalities and powers in the heavens that the Lamb was victorious. That's nowhere?
There is so little worthwhile in STP's little formulas and esoteric comments. Even his makeup clashes.
I see so little value in D'ism that I could care less what happens to it. Sorry you're upset about those groups; try to keep pursuits distinct; I take no pleasure seeing what those groups are doing.
I will say this: that the Gospel is to the Christian community (not race based) what liberty is supposed to be to society; historically there is a connection.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The Di'sts at DTS thought they had it all solved when they pronounced that Dan, STP and PJ. That Israel and the church are the 2Ps. It is the flaw. it is nowhere in the NT. It doesn't sound like that.
Last edited:
Interplanner
Well-known member
As I said on p1:
So then: why do both Judaism and D'ism reject that that (Acts 2:30-31) was Christ's enthronement?
So then: why do both Judaism and D'ism reject that that (Acts 2:30-31) was Christ's enthronement?
STP will set you straight in the morning. Why do resist STP's sound words to you? He is trying to help you get out of the doldrums -
- Status