dodge
New member
The New Covenant is explicit it is written to " any man "
2Co 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
ECT Seeking list of Hebrews verses from MADs/D'ists that are allowed for Christians
- Thread starter Interplanner
- Start date
The New Covenant is explicit it is written to " any man "
2Co 5:17
Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
Interplanner
Well-known member
True, but as you notice in detail here, it is the person in Christ. The new covenant was between the Father and Christ, AKA the eternal covenant of Heb 13. That's how Christ is 'made a covenant for the nations.' (Isaiah __) He is a representative. He performed the obligation on our behalf; we enjoy it through him, in him.
It doesn't have anything to do with Judea as a land in this life, though the NHNE is part of it, and is what the prophets were speaking of.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Made up.
Interplanner
Well-known member
The eternal covenant is not made up. He is the Lamb slain before the foundation of the world. It always was the plan. "Israel" the ethne was a copy and shadow of what was to be in Christ. Not the other way around.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Interplanner
Well-known member
That's too narrow of a support base, STP. I'm talking whole sections of hebrews and all the NT references to the new covenant altogether.
When you narrow it down to that, 2P2P's "let me help you with the bible" structures take over too easily.
The 'new' covenant is new to Judaism because of the passing stage that it had. Gal 3:8 is way ahead of you on this. It is a stronghold that Judaism cannot see outside of its stage or phase. I don't know what puts a person 'in Christ' any more than Paul does, but I know that the blindspot is removed 'in Christ.' 2 Cor 5:16+. 3:14+. 11:4.
To this day, you do not acknowledge to present tense, nor universal force, of these passages about the new covenant. We are several months into this, and you don't assent to the NT or AAL (for RD).
Your base is too narrow and shoddy work. As all of 2P2P is.
Nope - Paul's use of "if" in his "if any man be in Christ" is not a reference to "any man" - rather to "any man...in Christ."
His "if" there is his use of a First Class Condition - he was talking to, about, and referring to Believers. There - the Corinthians.
His point being "you're in Christ - look at things from that; quit looking at things from your former, fleshly perspective."
As when a parent says "if your my son; you know better."
Whether or not said child is that parent's son is not what is in question.
Rather, their need to walk worthy of the particular perspective that said parent has raised them in.
Paul's use there, is the same as his use of a First Class Condition "if" in his writing the following to the Body of Christ at Rome, say, in....
Romans 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 6:7 For he that is dead is freed from sin. 6:8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: 6:9 Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. 6:10 For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. 6:11 Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
In both Epistles, he is pointing out a thing that IS.
And that THEY should be walking in light of THE REALITY OF.
That they ARE in Christ.
He was NOT referring to ANY man.
He was referring to Body members.
2 Corinthians 5:5 Now he that hath wrought us for the selfsame thing is God, who also hath given unto us the earnest of the Spirit. 5:14 For the love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: 5:15 And that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again. 5:16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh: yea, though we have known Christ after the flesh, yet now henceforth know we him no more. 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. 5:18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.
Last edited:
Irrelevant. Members of the boc, yes, are identified as above, but apart from any covenant.
More speculation, disjointed rambling, random posting of verses, psycho babble, psychologist musings, Jean Paul Sarte/Albert Camus "inner Id" philosophy, talk show chit chat, Budhism.....
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
dodge
New member
How many Holy of Holies were there in the temple, which Christians NOW enter into in Christ Jesus ?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
One. But only God dwelled there.
Interplanner
Well-known member
Of course that is not was is meant by Christ about narrow. An idiotic, destructive response.
Your theology needs to be based on the largest passages that are exactly on-point and in coordination with all the others on the topic. It needs to let the NT be the final interp of the OT, and the letters to be the final interp of the gospel or apostle accounts, not random, one-off incidents in those narratives.
Instead of doing this, when you are confronted with the rest of the New Covenant references in the NT, you go 'huh'?
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
List them all for us. Teach us, line upon line and precept upon precept, show us how Gentiles get into it.
The floor is yours.
SaulToPaul 2
Well-known member
Yes, saint john, IP did not allow me any latitude in my usage of the LORD's statement.
Wonder what causes that?