ECT Rightly Dividing

[tetelestai]

One of the meanings of the Hebrew word translated "covenant" is "treaty."

I don't care who many meanings the word has, no antichrist can make a covenant.

The New Covenant could not be "made strong" until the Cross.

Ok, but that doesn't help you. Especially considering most of your fellow Darby followers deny the new covenant was put in place.

You bore me to death so I am going to hit the sack.

buenas noches

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

You show once again how ignorant you are. Just lately a man used DNA evidence to determine who the killer was and the person which the DNA lead to was the same person Anderson and Scotland Yard named as the killer more than one hundred years ago. Of course you are ignorant of the fact that Scotland Yard had an eyewitness to one of the murders and that eyewitness immediately identified Anderson's suspect as the killer.

Now that I got you here why don't you tell us why we should believe that the Jews who lived under the law could not be saved apart from works, especially when we consider what is said here:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).​

That explains why the Lord Jesus could say this to the Jews who lived under the law:

"It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life" (Jn.6:63).​

These things are so simple but they are way above your meager understanding because you put more faith in what some men say about the Scriptures than you do in what the Scriptures actually say!

So now it is time for you to run and hide from the truths found at John 3:16 and John 6:63.

:wave2: The "Ripper" was none other than: Professor Moriarty!!"

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

Hey Jerry, your conclusions are always simple minded. So simple, as to be childish.

 

[Grosnick Marowbe]

The Ripper case remains a secret. Except to you, Jerry. Have you found the
whereabouts of The Abominable Snowman, the loch-Ness Monster, and Godzilla
yet? Perhaps, you ought to search the ruins of Frankenstein's Castle? They, no
doubt, have some clues that will lead you to future discoveries?

 

[oatmeal]

Oatmeal,
my #199 was supposed to be a reply.

So the verse has nothing to do with finding major time distinctions God has created for history.

If you want to study that and study where the passage itself says it is about that, you want to be especially in Gal 3 where v8 tells us what God announced ahead of time, and what the Scripture foresaw. It also contains v17 in which Judaism tried to replace the Promise with the Gospel. There is no other entity out there that Paul could be referring to.

Ah, I was not referring to your post.

I was tossing in my post to see if anyone wanted to discuss the subject of the thread more directly.

Rightly dividing.

Trying to narrow the focus down to one topic, how to rightly divide the word of truth.

Should there be as many ways to rightly divide the truth as there is to skin a cat?

I would have liked if this thread would stick with how to rightly divide the word of truth.

I gave one of many principles I used and gave three examples.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Hey Jerry, your conclusions are always simple minded. So simple, as to be childish.

You talk big but when it comes to actually addressing verses you run away like a little child. At least I stand up like a man and will address any verse!

All I see from you are the traits of a "natural" man:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

You prove that you can understand what those in the Neo-MAD camp teache but when it comes to actually understanding what the Scriptures teach you are helpless.

 

[kayaker]

Just to generally toss on the table:

Were Abraham's progeny via Keturah, ancestrally intact Hebrews? In Genesis 25:1, 2, 3, 4, in v. 2 we find Keturah's son, Shuah.

Since Shuah was a Canaanite (Genesis 38:1, 2), and his daughter was a Canaanitess (1Chronicles 2:3 KJV), doesn't that make Abraham's wife Keturah a Canaanitess?

Since Keturah's son Shuah was a Canaanite (Genesis 38:1, 2), and his daughter, wife of Judah, was a Canaanitess (1Chronicles 2:3 KJV), does that make Judah's son Shelah an ancestrally intact Israelite? Genesis 38:6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 26. Was Shelah an ancestrally intact Jew?

Think about Deuteronomy 7:1, 2, 3, and Ezra 9:1, 2, 7 some 1,400 years later. I don't think those laws were ever divided, rather rescinded, speaking of rightly dividing the Word.

Please listen again to Revelation 2:9 KJV, Revelation 3:9 KJV speaking of rightly dividing the Word: who is a true Jew, and who is a liar Jew?

kayaker

 

[HisServant]

You talk big but when it comes to actually addressing verses you run away like a little child. At least I stand up like a man and will address any verse!

All I see from you are the traits of a "natural" man:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

You prove that you can understand what those in the Neo-MAD camp teache but when it comes to actually understanding what the Scriptures teach you are helpless.

The bible wasn't written in verses. I am convinced that it was Satan that caused the idiot to add verse notation to scripture... so that people like you would pervert the word.

Your disrespect of scripture is staggering... and lazy.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

The bible wasn't written in verses. I am convinced that it was Satan that caused the idiot to add verse notation to scripture... so that people like you would pervert the word.

Perhaps the verse numbers and chapters were added to help people locate certain things in the Bible? And in what way did the adding of verse notations lead to a perversion of the Bible?

Your disrespect of scripture is staggering... and lazy.

As usual you make false accusations against those who do not agree with your silly ideas.

 

[Danoh]

You talk big but when it comes to actually addressing verses you run away like a little child. At least I stand up like a man and will address any verse!

All I see from you are the traits of a "natural" man:

"But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor.2:14).​

You prove that you can understand what those in the Neo-MAD camp teache but when it comes to actually understanding what the Scriptures teach you are helpless.

"you run away like a little child. At least I stand up like a man..."

Yep, no "natural man" in any of that.

2 Corinthians 10:

7. Do ye look on things after the outward appearance? If any man trust to himself that he is Christ’s, let him of himself think this again, that, as he is Christ’s, even so are we Christ’s.

 

[HisServant]

Perhaps the verse numbers and chapters were added to help people locate certain things in the Bible? And in what way did the adding of verse notations lead to a perversion of the Bible?

Because people like you now feel they have license to only quote PART of what was being taught in a particular book of scripture. Show the entire chapter and even overlap chapters when necessary, let the reader examine the entire section of scripture and determine for themselves if what you are trying to teach from it is in harmony with what the inspired writer wrote. 9 times out of 10, the message you are portraying by showing an individual verse is not consistent with the authors intent.

As usual you make false accusations against those who do not agree with your silly ideas.

People posting individual verses is akin to blasphemy in my book.

 

[Danoh]

...As usual you make false accusations against those who do not agree with your silly ideas.

A picture being worth a thousand words, if you could somehow turn your words hereinabove into an image, you'd have a perfect self-portrait you could replace that Anderson image with.

 

[SaulToPaul 2]

Where did you get the idea that satan could make a covenant?

Oh, that's right, you got it from Sir Robert Anderson.

Daniel refers to the prince of the covenant, a vile person, which is certainly not the Lord Jesus Christ.

The fact that you think some antichrist can make a covenant is preposterous.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

People posting individual verses is akin to blasphemy in my book.

Are you not aware that if someone takes a verse out of context that you can point that out?

The bible wasn't written in verses. I am convinced that it was Satan that caused the idiot to add verse notation to scripture... so that people like you would pervert the word.

In what way did the adding of verse notations lead to a perversion of the Bible?

Perhaps the verse numbers and chapters were added to help people locate certain things in the Bible?

 

[HisServant]

Are you not aware that if someone takes a verse out of context that you can point that out?

The scripture as written will do that all by itself... what are you afraid of?

In what way did the adding of verse notations lead to a perversion of the Bible?

Perhaps the verse numbers and chapters were added to help people locate certain things in the Bible?

If they were provided for location only... why don't you use them that way?

If God had wanted chapter and verse notation, he would have inspired the authors to do it. Do you think what he inspired is inadequate?

 

[Jerry Shugart]

People posting individual verses is akin to blasphemy in my book.

Then this is blasphemy in your opinion:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).​

Somehow that surprises me none!

 

[Danoh]

The scripture as written will do that all by itself... what are you afraid of?

If they were provided for location only... why don't you use them that way?

If God had wanted chapter and verse notation, he would have inspired the authors to do it. Do you think what he inspired is inadequate?

Hwsthsrd? - thescriptureaswrittenwilldothatallbyitselfwhat are you afraid ofiftheywereprovidedforlocationonlywhydon'tyouusethem thatwayifgodhadwantedchapterandversenotationhewouldhaveinspiredtheauthorstodoitdoyouthinkwhatheinspiredisinadequate...

Rths?thscrptrswrttnwlldthtllbytslfwhtryfrdffthywrprvddfrctnnlywhdntysthmthtwyfgdhdwntdchptrndvrsnttnhwldhvnsprdththrstdtdythnkwhthnsprdsndqt...

And what about these divisions in bold - Luke 4:

17. And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written,

21. And he began to say unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.

Or how about the fact that throughout the NT they all quote one or more passages apart from those other passages found there where they are quoting from?

Your argument is off-base because it is man's God-given ingenuity in Adam, that has enabled that in us.

For that matter, why then are you on the internet, on a forum, using a computer, typing words man taught you how to write, etc.

Think before you conclude a thing. Run its math backwards, see if things still add up, consider what you may have not considered....

... and you cannot but end up Mid-Acts, by the way

... though, not Jerry's Neo mess, hopefully :bang:

 

[HisServant]

Then this is blasphemy in your opinion:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life" (Jn.3:16).​

Somehow that surprises me none!

You are missing a lot of what was being taught by showing that individual verse.

Kind of like censoring God.

Jesus Teaches Nicodemus

1Now there was a Pharisee, a man named Nicodemus who was a member of the Jewish ruling council. 2He came to Jesus at night and said, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him.”

3Jesus replied, “Very truly I tell you, no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again.a ”

4“How can someone be born when they are old?” Nicodemus asked. “Surely they cannot enter a second time into their mother’s womb to be born!”

5Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. 6Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spiritb gives birth to spirit. 7You should not be surprised at my saying, ‘Youc must be born again.’ 8The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit.”d

9“How can this be?” Nicodemus asked.

10“You are Israel’s teacher,” said Jesus, “and do you not understand these things? 11Very truly I tell you, we speak of what we know, and we testify to what we have seen, but still you people do not accept our testimony. 12I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe if I speak of heavenly things? 13No one has ever gone into heaven except the one who came from heaven—the Son of Man.e 14Just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness, so the Son of Man must be lifted up,f 15that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him.”g

16For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God’s one and only Son. 19This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil. 20Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed. 21But whoever lives by the truth comes into the light, so that it may be seen plainly that what they have done has been done in the sight of God.

 

[tetelestai]

Daniel refers to the prince of the covenant, a vile person, which is certainly not the Lord Jesus Christ.

Nope

Christ Jesus made the covenant with His shed blood.

Darby's protege Sir Robert Anderson is the one who invented the theory that an antichrist makes a covenant with Israel in the yet future.

Your Dispensationalism is a mess.

 

[tetelestai]

Hwsthsrd? - thescriptureaswrittenwilldothatallbyitselfwhat are you afraid ofiftheywereprovidedforlocationonlywhydon'tyouusethem thatwayifgodhadwantedchapterandversenotationhewouldhaveinspiredtheauthorstodoitdoyouthinkwhatheinspiredisinadequate...

Rths?thscrptrswrttnwlldthtllbytslfwhtryfrdffthywrprvddfrctnnlywhdntysthmthtwyfgdhdwntdchptrndvrsnttnhwldhvnsprdththrstdtdythnkwhthnsprdsndqt...

They were all upper case letters, not a mix of upper and lower case as in your example.