ECT Salvation are its gates and walls

I

Interplanner

Well-known member
How terrible that the OT should use the picture of the strong city about God's salvation! (Is 26:1) Equally bad that the city of David is cursed with woes! (29:1) So that Cornerstone laid in Zion--in 28--guess where that is. And the day that God himself is the crown and wreath of his people, hmmm?

It's despicable that these passages would be about the Gospel and not about the 'other' Israel, the other program. It makes God a liar, etc.

Yet the NT's use of all this is exactly why we know the Bible is coherent and inspired, and that we never did need Chafer and Ryrie to make sense of it.

I hope our D'ist friends understand the math of the double negatives:
'The Bible doesn't make sense' (1st negative), but
Chafer and Ryrie's other program doesn't make sense over and over (2nd negative).
Only to our D'ist friends, this comes out 'positive!'

To the rest of us, -2 and -2 make -4.
 
D

Danoh

New member
Interplanner said:
Salvation are its gates and walls

How terrible that the OT should use the picture of the strong city about God's salvation! (Is 26:1) Equally bad that the city of David is cursed with woes! (29:1) So that Cornerstone laid in Zion--in 28--guess where that is. And the day that God himself is the crown and wreath of his people, hmmm?

It's despicable that these passages would be about the Gospel and not about the 'other' Israel, the other program. It makes God a liar, etc.

Yet the NT's use of all this is exactly why we know the Bible is coherent and inspired, and that we never did need Chafer and Ryrie to make sense of it.

I hope our D'ist friends understand the math of the double negatives:
'The Bible doesn't make sense' (1st negative), but
Chafer and Ryrie's other program doesn't make sense over and over (2nd negative).
Only to our D'ist friends, this comes out 'positive!'

To the rest of us, -2 and -2 make -4.
Click to expand...

Sort of like "salvation ARE" ay? :chuckle:

Rom. 5: 6-8
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
How terrible that the OT should use the picture of the strong city about God's salvation! (Is 26:1) Equally bad that the city of David is cursed with woes! (29:1) So that Cornerstone laid in Zion--in 28--guess where that is. And the day that God himself is the crown and wreath of his people, hmmm?

It's despicable that these passages would be about the Gospel and not about the 'other' Israel, the other program. It makes God a liar, etc.

Yet the NT's use of all this is exactly why we know the Bible is coherent and inspired, and that we never did need Chafer and Ryrie to make sense of it.

I hope our D'ist friends understand the math of the double negatives:
'The Bible doesn't make sense' (1st negative), but
Chafer and Ryrie's other program doesn't make sense over and over (2nd negative).
Only to our D'ist friends, this comes out 'positive!'

To the rest of us, -2 and -2 make -4.
Click to expand...

What's your point? We know that the LORD and the New Jerusalem will be married...joined.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Isaiah
26:9 With my soul have I desired thee in the night; yea, with my spirit within me will I seek thee early: for when thy judgments are in the earth, the inhabitants of the world will learn righteousness.
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
What's your point? We know that the LORD and the New Jerusalem will be married...joined.
Click to expand...




Good for you. It's the only Jerusalem the Bible was ever about. It's the one that people who have 'hesed' belong to. It never was about the one on earth, Heb 11, and never will be--unless you mean the NHNE which is after quite a meltdown. THAT is the other program that would like to replace the promised Gospel. That is the real replacement theology issue.

How can you not understand that when people line up behind a human system that is supposed to make sense, and that when it does not make sense, they have taken 2 steps backward--to destruction, to carnality, etc.?
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Ezekiel
37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
Ezekiel
37:25 And they shall dwell in the land that I have given unto Jacob my servant, wherein your fathers have dwelt; and they shall dwell therein, even they, and their children, and their children's children for ever: and my servant David shall be their prince for ever.
Click to expand...

I do not know how anyone can deny this.

The Fathers did not dwell in the New Jerusalem in the past..."wherein your fathers have dwelt".
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
I do not know how anyone can deny this.

The Fathers did not dwell in the New Jerusalem in the past..."wherein your fathers have dwelt".
Click to expand...





so why didn't the apostles use this to make it clear, right in Heb 11, that it never was about the land the way were in in the past nor the one they had come to?

It's not the only thing the OT or the NT says on the subject, so it has to assimilate with the rest of it. Otherwise, we might as well find that piece of granite that is called 'Salvation' or the marble carving that is called 'Praise' and tie outselves to them, because it's going to happen right there right? And only there?
 
I

Interplanner

Well-known member
SaulToPaul said:
Thick irony...
Click to expand...




Show me the carnality as the NT defines it. When a person believes what the Gospel is saying about the mercy of God that is full and complete in Christ, they live a life of spiritual sacrifices by being unified with believers from other ethnic backgrounds. Rom 11-12, uncompartmentalized, unbroken. btw, that term sacrifices? that's from temple worship. But now the temple, and all things, have been made 'new.'
 
SaulToPaul 2

SaulToPaul 2

Well-known member
Interplanner said:
so why didn't the apostles use this to make it clear, right in Heb 11, that it never was about the land the way were in in the past nor the one they had come to?

It's not the only thing the OT or the NT says on the subject, so it has to assimilate with the rest of it. Otherwise, we might as well find that piece of granite that is called 'Salvation' or the marble carving that is called 'Praise' and tie outselves to them, because it's going to happen right there right? And only there?
Click to expand...

If God said it only once, it should suffice.
Why do you hate the idea of some people inheriting that land for ever? That's the real issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top